[Asterisk-Users] rxfax(spandsp-0.0.2pre18) and HT488

[Steve Underwood]

Rich Adamson wrote:

>>>Steve, what would help a bunch of people trying to implement your
>>>spandsp is some kind of help document that at least attempts to
>>>describe some of the debug statements shown below. When the average
>>>person reads "hdlc underflow" or "T4 timeout in state 9", we don't
>>>have a clue what those statements really mean or even if they need
>>>to be addressed. I've probably spent at least 60 hours doing the 
>>>same thing and finally gave up.
>>>
>>>If you really want to reduce your support overhead for spandsp, put
>>>something together that gives the implementor at least some clues
>>>how to read that stuff, and maybe even a clue how to resolve some
>>>of the more common issues. The foip.html appears to be a reasonable
>>>'background', but certainly not anything reaonable to resolve the
>>>OP debug output below.
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>Actually, that page explains why he is wasting his time. It wasn't 
>>intended as background material. It was intended as the minimum needed 
>>to get people off my back when they insist that if they use ulaw or alaw 
>>FAXing over a VoIP channel must be OK. Its the only support for this 
>>kind of issue they will get from me.
>>    
>>
>
>Wow, I didn't get it and I'd bet the OP didn't either.
>  
>
So let me get his clear. If I don't document things I am in the wrong, 
whereas if I do document them I am in the wrong. Is that it?

What is the page supposed to say? Something like:

IF YOU TRY TO FAX OVER A VOIP CHANNEL YOU ARE WASTING YOUR TIME. DON'T 
WASTE MINE.

maybe? Would that win your seal of approval? -)

Regards,
Steve