[asterisk-dev] Proposal to bring pjproject back into the fold

[Jared Smith]

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 9:30 AM, George Joseph <george.joseph at fairview5.com>
wrote:

> ​I understand the packaging issue and I'd like to hear from packagers like
> Jared Smith.


Not sure what to say here -- bundling pjproject with Asterisk causes me a
world of hurt from a packaging standpoint.  Having them as separate
projects makes my job as a packager much much easier.


> We could simply require a specific version of Asterisk to be statically
> linked to a specific version of pjproject and let the packaging process
> insure it's there.  For rpms, a BuildRequires would do that.  There's be no
> runtime dependency after that.


And a "Requires:" would force that particular version to be present to
install the package -- but you're right -- it doesn't enforce it at *run
time*.


If there are things that I can do from a packaging standpoint to make
things easier (either on the pjproject side or the Asterisk side) of the
Fedora/RHEL/CentOS packages, please don't hesitate to reach out to me.
I've already made one change last week (that George asked me to make), and
I'd be happy to make more.  I just don't play with Asterisk and pjproject
every day like I once could, so I often miss out on the little nuances
these days :-/

--
Jared Smith
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20160119/81138cbe/attachment-0001.html>