[hydra-dev] Still confused, but at a higher level

[Olle E. Johansson]

Friends,

After one week in Mexico I'm still a bit confused - which is to no surprise.

What keeps me confused is that our meeting started with "This is not Asterisk 2.0" but all we discuss and all cases point to Asterisk 2.0. All demonstrations pointed to Asterisk 2.0.

What is the scope of Hydra? Can we produce anything that will not be understood by our customers as Asterisk 2.0?

Or is this simply Asterisk 2.0 we're doing, and let's forget about it not being the software that will replace Asterisk.

I feel that we need to define this product now. Before discussing rpc platforms or any other thing. What is the need we're trying to fulfill? What hole in the market place are we trying to occupy? Without a project scope we have no clue on where we're going and any discussion about ice or boost is just a hacker's discussion and nothing else. If I signed the bill, I would definitely stop doing that before we had a product plan we can communicate.

And no, I have nothing against defining Asterisk 2.0. All my notes from the beach is about Asterisk 2.0 - not Hydra as it was presented in the first few slides.

Greetings from a jetlagged hacker, back in Sweden.

/O