[asterisk-dev] Time to rename chan_gulp?

[Andrew Latham]

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Matthew Jordan <mjordan at digium.com> wrote:
> On 04/29/2013 07:20 AM, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
>>
>> 29 apr 2013 kl. 13:47 skrev "Malcolm C. Davenport" <malcolmd at digium.com>:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 29, 2013, at 6:09 AM, "Olle E. Johansson" <oej at edvina.net> wrote:
>>>
>
> <snip>
>
>>
>> It's hard to use english language games in a product that's used world-wide. One has to be very careful with naming stuff that's going to be used in production.
>> We need to have a professional and serious attitude in our product. Naming something "gulp" is not going to help.
>>
>> And "gulp" hasn't been in use outside development.
>>
>
> I'm all for name suggestions. We've stuck with 'gulp' mostly because we
> didn't have any other alternatives (and it is kinda clever).
>
> A list of things we've kicked around or have been suggested here:
>
> * sipng
> * sip2
> * sipnew
> * pjsip
> * sippy (or sipy)
> * sipast
> * astsip
> * gulp
>
> I'm fine with whatever we call this. How about a vote being taken on the
> channel driver name and we go with whatever the majority of people
> decide is best?
>
> (As an aside: patches welcome on assisting with the name change
> refactoring effort :-))
>
> --
> Matthew Jordan
> Digium, Inc. | Engineering Manager
> 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
> Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org

My personal feelings are to use chan_sip name for the work in
chan_gulp and mark the origional sip work with a chan_sip1 or
chan_oldsip.

I don't expect a lot of agreement but its how things are done in some circles.

-- 
~ Andrew "lathama" Latham lathama at gmail.com http://lathama.net ~