On 14 Nov 2006, at 14:28, Andreas Fink wrot
e
e) MMSC??? ... which some of us have already.
MMSC is not really the same as the goal of Kannel even though
Kannel can be a helper there. Furthermore there are not many
demands for MMSC's as most operators block access to their MMSC
network so a non operator can not make use of it.
f) IMPS???
What's that?
Instant Messaging and Presence Service. It used to be Nokia Wireless
Village, but now it is developed by OMA
Used, as name implies for IM with mobile phones
I guess the biggest win would be a whole lot more readable and much
smaller codebase, we could get more people involved because not
everybody loves to code in C these days, and also it would be a bit
easier to maintain.
I disagree on this one. Not everyone talks Java neither. And
there's not less code. Thats for sure.
I am converting A SIP Client using Kannel gwlib to objective C.
Curious thing is, how one to one the
transformation is. Note that Kannel is already quite object oriented,
even though it is writeen in C.
.
and what about the patch for setting the sender in Wap Push
I got my Kannel patched to do so, with a patch provided on the
list, but why don't add that patch or functionality to Kannel??
it's something it doesn't have sense not to have...
I didnt follow that patch but setting the sender in a wap push
makes sense and as far as I know it worked in the past simply by
&from=...
I'm sure if you provided a patch it wont get rejected because no
one wants to have that feature. Most of the time no one had time to
add it or voting never happened.
Yep. Perhaps we should all at least comment the patch on the general
level.
Aarno
