[asterisk-dev] Module Deprecation, Default Not Building, and Removal

[משרד GIS מערכות תקשורת]

as per my experience with systems built on top of asterisk not just vanilla
asterisk it took like 4 full years from starting implantation for pjsip
starting at  Mon, 04 Jul 2016 12:
>Added PJSIP tables and started integrating it<dd>First round of changes to
introduce PJSIP... wow... it will be a huge blood bath, for start, you need
asterisk 13.10 and chan_sip is not usable on 13.10. Stay tuned for next
releases </dd>
till recently on,
11 May 2020 00:55:54 +0200 >Added a way to mass change the tech for
extensions from chan_sip to PJSIP and back. It is available on
Configuration/Extensions page

and still fixing bugs  94 fixis  in four years when doing major changes 4
years is needed minor stuff could go faster

think of all the guys who are running asterisk the last 5 years and need a
complete change you need time plan sometimes the latest os when you have
just another integration crm which for now can work only with   the older
os etc

On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 10:55 PM Joshua C. Colp <jcolp at sangoma.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 4:31 PM BJ Weschke <bweschke at btwtech.com> wrote:
>
>> Four years, is indeed, really long. I do agree with this. As an example,
>> I work with another project where the work involves some integrations with
>> software that is in the head units of vehicles. Right now, they’re working
>> to certify and lock down code and functionality for the 2023 vehicle model
>> year which will hit dealer lots for the first time in just about two years
>> from now. Once final certification occurs, in the vast majority of cases,
>> nothing changes and the vehicles roll off the assembly line with the
>> integration that was certified. If software that is involved in the
>> manufacturing of vehicles can manage change risk within a two year window,
>> it only seems reasonable that the Asterisk project should be able to do the
>> same.
>>
>
> From the development side we certainly can. The question is really - is it
> fair to the Asterisk user base, will they they accept it, will there be
> substantial backlash? The answer could be its fine. I don't really have a
> concrete answer though at this moment and likely wouldn't until put into
> action.
>
> For a 2 year strategy I think it would go as such:
>
> 1. Minor releases receive change to indicate that module is to be
> deprecated in a future major release
> 2. Module is marked deprecated and defaultenabled no in standard release
> (19), which carries over to next LTS release (20)
> 3. Announcement and documentation for each includes notice of deprecated
> modules
> 4. Standard release after this it is removed (21), which carries over to
> next LTS release (22)
> 5. Announcement and documentation for each includes notice of removed
> modules
>
> A wiki page would still be kept to keep track of modules in process of
> being removed.
>
> Note that I'm just putting this out there so people see in comparison to
> the other one what the process would be like.
>
> --
> Joshua C. Colp
> Asterisk Technical Lead
> Sangoma Technologies
> Check us out at www.sangoma.com and www.asterisk.org
> --
> _____________________________________________________________________
> -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --
>
> asterisk-dev mailing list
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
>    http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20201001/16d1b503/attachment-0001.html>