<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Adam Goryachev wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid1098853357.13740.20.camel@workhorse" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Wed, 2004-10-27 at 13:37, Jim Van Meggelen wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">People will want to pay for your expertise because you wrote (or at
least contributed to) the base platform, or language, or what-have-you.
The more one contributes, the more their credibility is established --
their services gain value. This holds true not only for individuals, but
for companies as well.
Rather than people trying to lock their "brilliance" away so only they
can use it, I'd rather like to envision something such as the Perl folks
have; ACAN, the Asterisk Comprehensive Archive Network (we need a better
acronym, but I digress).
Folks would contribute all kinds of interesting dialplan functions,
which can tyhen be downloaded (and improved!) by the community. Some of
them are junk; the crucible that is open-source will either weed them
out, or fix them. The best in class will rise to the top, and become the
standard way of solving a particular challenge. There will always be
choice.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I did try to setup something along those lines. A couple of times I
tried to encourage people to use the repository I setup, AFAIK, it has
never been used, not that I've really worried/worked on it since it was
never used...
See <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.websitemanagers.com.au/asterisk/">http://www.websitemanagers.com.au/asterisk/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
I think that it's hard to reach a critical mass on a project like
this. The way I see it, there's 4 places people will probably look for
asterisk add-ons right now:<br>
<br>
[in no particular order]:<br>
<br>
1) asterisk.org <br>
2) The wiki<br>
3) bugs.digium.com<br>
4) google.<br>
<br>
The part that is important in your "ACAN" idea is "comprehensive", and
right now, the most comprehensive place is probably the union of the
wiki and bugs.digium.com. <br>
<br>
The structure of your site is nice -- just like freshmeat. Is there a
real advantage in using this site, as opposed to freshmeat, with
appropriate "trove" categories?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>