[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Remove chan_usbradio and app_rpt.

[Steve Totaro]

On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Tilghman Lesher <tilghman at meg.abyt.es>wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 9, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Steve Totaro
> <stotaro at totarotechnologies.com> wrote:
> > I am not sure why it is not maintained when Jim Dixon has the code on the
> > repo, supposedly something in Asterisk is broken and broke app_rpt.
>
> No, when the change from Zaptel to DAHDI was made, the API was cleaned
> up in the process, and that broke the interface.  The change from
> Zaptel to DAHDI was all about someone else's trademark on the Zaptel
> name.  The maintainers of app_rpt have made a strategic decision that
> they don't want to do the work to make their code compatible with
> DAHDI.  There's no technical reason why they couldn't -- there's
> several competing hardware manufacturers who have kept pace and made
> their work compatible with DAHDI.
>
> > I think that whoever made the decision does not want to sign away the
> > rights to their code, there are hundreds of millions of  dollars in this
> > functionality.  I would probably not want to relinquish my rights to my
> > code under Digiums' dual license.
>
> That makes utterly no sense.  The code was previously in Asterisk, so
> it was already under a dual license.  It's clear that you harbor bad
> feelings toward Digium, but not everybody is as short-sighted.  Hell,
> I got fired from Digium, and I don't even have this level of vitriol
> towards the company.
>
> -Tilghman
>
>
Sorry to hear you got fired.

So DAHDI that was supposed to be a drop in replacement for ZAPTEL, just a
find and replace function, yet it broke the interface.  I am correct,
although it technically wasn't Asterisk that broke it, it was DAHDI and
there is history that DAHDI was to be a total drop in replacement, not a
re-write, but then someone was not as smart as they looked and started
changing code.



I know all about the name change.  The name change was bogus anyways, a
calling card company and a company that works with a multi function VoIP
platform are different enough to have the same name.

http://business.zibb.com/trademark/zaptel/29737279

Filing Date:1999

Zaptel used by Jim Dixon common law trademark with interstate commerce was
at the latest 1999 and probably earlier.  I cannot find the original BSD
driver for the first Tormenta card, but that was the start of the Zaptel
Telephony Project.  If it was before the federal filing date, then they had
no grounds for anything laying claim.

Digium wanted it's own federal trademark so they could pull another Ad
Words debacle if they wanted.

http://flatplanetphone.com/wordpress/?p=450

The timeline is incredible, Zaptel -> DAHDI (2008) Digium bans use of
Asterisk in Adwords (2008).....

You are clearly not part of the app_rpt community nor familiar with the
issues.

The code was previously in Asterisk before the invention, manufacturing,
and distribution of the URI, prior to that, you are correct, it was under
dual license, now it is not.  Any new code which is most of it without
doing a diff, is not under dual license, is it?

Are you aware of the new appliances?

I will not fault you for your ignorance since it is a niche that you are
not part of.

Who are these competing vendors????  I know of zero.

I think the dual license is crap, you are right, so do MANY other people
who do not GIVE Digium their hard work to integrate with Digium closed
source products and sell for profit, you know that although you may not
agree with them working for a for profit company for free, some are sour to
it.

Thanks,
Steve T
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20120309/6f73d130/attachment.htm>