[asterisk-users] How long will Asterisk 1.4.x supported/maintained

[Matt Florell]

On 11/20/08, Steve Totaro <stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:38 AM, Tzafrir Cohen <tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com> wrote:
>  > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 08:25:54AM +0100, Olivier wrote:
>  >> 2008/11/17 Philipp Kempgen <philipp.kempgen at amooma.de>
>  >>
>  >> > Tilghman Lesher schrieb:
>  >> > > On Thursday 13 November 2008 08:16:42 Klaus Darilion wrote:
>  >> > >> Is there somewhere a statement from Digium how long they will support
>  >> > >> Asterisk 1.4?
>  >> > >
>
> 0>> > > There is no statement, because we haven't even discussed when
>
> the EOL for
>  >> > > 1.4 will be reached.  Certainly that means it won't happen for at least
>  >> > the
>  >> > > next 60 days, but beyond that, I really don't know.
>  >> >
>  >> > For the average non-techie user who does not want to compile
>  >> > themselves that may sound funny (if not scary).
>  >> >
>  >> > When Debian Lenny (featuring Asterisk 1.4) is finally going to be
>  >> > released that version might not even be supported any more.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> I think to a large extend, Asterisk is not to be considered as binary
>  >> distributed at all, as many hardware it supports is not directly managed by
>  >> kernel team.
>  >
>  > Interesting consideration. Debian Etch and RHEL5 are based on kernel
>  > 2.6.18, but support quite a few hardware devices not included in that
>  > kernel.
>  >
>  > If this issue bothers you, please help test the alternative timing
>  > mechanism support now included in trunk.
>  >
>  > --
>  >               Tzafrir Cohen
>  > icq#16849755              jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
>  > +972-50-7952406           mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
>  > http://www.xorcom.com  iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir
>  >
>
>
> I still compile and install 1.2 for the most part, for call centers
>  and large systems.
>
>  The few 1.4 installs that I have done have been for "medium" sized
>  PBXs, say 50-70 phones/users and they have been trouble free for the
>  most part.  Safe_asterisk may make some troubles transparent.
>
>  I am not really sure what 1.4 has over 1.2 for the average PBX installation.
>
>  Then you have the OpenPBX guys who forked 1.2, I know they have added
>  functionality to 1.2, but the following puts me off.  Perhaps
>  vaporware, perhaps not, it all relies on the devs.  You also have
>  people like Matt Florell who have continued to add functionality to
>  1.2 but since Digium won't take them, or the dev doesn't want to sign
>  over their first born, they are hard to come by but certainly out
>  there.
>
>  1.4 may follow the same path, being forked.
>
>  1.6 is not on my radar.
>
>
>  --
>  Thanks,
>  Steve Totaro
>  +18887771888 (Toll Free)
>  +12409381212 (Cell)
>  +12024369784 (Skype)

Hello,

We really just maintain a set of patches for 1.2 (just updated
waitforsilence a couple weeks ago in fact) and we regularly install
1.2.30.2 in call center setups. It is rock solid and extremely proven
in high-call-volume situations.

We have started installing 1.4.21.2 on some systems that are not high
load as well (1.4.22 has some strange issues with it we have noticed)
because we do have clients requesting to use 1.4 for some of the nicer
PBX functionality that it has as well as better SIP support.

We test 1.6 periodically and we are very much looking forward to some
of the great new features of it, but it crashes very quickly when
trying to use it in call center situations. just keep in mind that in
my opinion the 1.4 tree did not become usable until 1.4.18 when most
of the major bugs were finally fixed.

MATT---