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

[Steve Totaro]

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:42 AM, Matt Florell <astmattf at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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---
>

As a fellow call center engineerimplementer I completely agree with
Matt's opinion.

-- 
Thanks,
Steve Totaro
+18887771888 (Toll Free)
+12409381212 (Cell)
+12024369784 (Skype)