This is good to know that things those few things have been fixed. I only learned it from this email. Shouldn't the fixes info be transmitted like with a patched version ( siremis 2.0.1 ) or something.
Anyway good jobs guyz, dont take me as a thankless user. Cheers -- On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 4:30 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla <mico...@gmail.com>wrote: > Hello, > > > On 11/8/10 11:29 AM, Lee Archer wrote: > >> Hi, does Siremis have some sort of SVN where the latest branch with >> updates can be downloaded or do we need to wait until you release the >> fixed version? >> > the project has an svn repository hosted on sourceforge.net, but it still > has the sources of 1.0.x. it will be fixed in the near future > > Re-download the tar ball from the web, it has now the fixes for lcr and > siremis own-user management: > > http://siremis.asipto.com/pub/downloads/siremis/siremis-2.0.0.tgz > > Cheers, > Daniel > > > Regards >> >> Lee >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org >> [mailto:sr-users-boun...@lists.sip-router.org] On Behalf Of Elena-Ramona >> Modroiu >> Sent: 05 November 2010 09:40 >> To: Klaus Feichtinger >> Cc: sr-users@lists.sip-router.org >> Subject: Re: [SR-Users] Siremis 2.0: error in LCR table editing?? >> >> Hi, >> >> thanks for reporting. It will be fixed soon. >> >> Regards, >> Ramona >> >> On 11/04/2010 02:16 PM, Klaus Feichtinger wrote: >> >>> Hello list, >>> >>> has anybody else tried using SIREMIS 2.0 for administrating LCR tables >>> in kamailio 3.1.0? >>> >>> I am not happy with the form / input boxes that are presented in the >>> web browser, because some fields are not as expected..... >>> >>> Following points are - from my point of view - incorrect: >>> >>> 1) table "LCR_Gateway_List": the fields 'URI-scheme', 'Transport' >>> and 'Strip' are represented by checkboxes. However, in reality these >>> fields are defined with smallint(3) types and e.g. transport is >>> representing values from NULL...4 - not boolean! >>> >>> 2) table "LCR_Target_List": the field priority is represented by a >>> checkbox, too. However, also this field is not boolean. Priorities are >>> represented by numbers, starting with '0' = highest priority a.s.o. >>> >>> >>> Can anybody check if this "problem" is a real one, or only present on >>> my PC? I have tested with IE and Firefox - the result is still the >>> >> same. >> >>> regards, >>> Klaus >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing >>> list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org >>> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list >> sr-users@lists.sip-router.org >> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> >> _______________________________________________ >> SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list >> sr-users@lists.sip-router.org >> http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >> > > -- > Daniel-Constantin Mierla > http://www.asipto.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list > sr-users@lists.sip-router.org > http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users >
_______________________________________________ SIP Express Router (SER) and Kamailio (OpenSER) - sr-users mailing list sr-users@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-users