On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 20:10 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello everyone not sure if this is the correct list to use or not, I was
> wondering if anyone is looking for a Asterisk tech or a web designer or
> asterisk agi scripter (in php)
>
In general, yes it is the correct list to ask on,
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 22:15 -0400, Gregory Boehnlein wrote:
> http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=6667 has lots of discussion regarding the
> issues w/ the Asterisk 1.2 DTMF stack. All of the issues that I raised in
> that bug report have been fixed in 1.4. Specifically, I was having issues w/
> So
Steve Totaro wrote:
*snipped
> You two have always posted good reads to the list. No sense making
> enemies over silly stuff, life is to short. It's not like he shot
> your dog
>
poor fluffy!
I agree with Steve on this one.. tomorrow is friday.. let small ** go.
__
> The version specifically I modified was 1.4.15 but I believe that
> 1.4.17 had the same issues. Unless there has been work since then on some
of
> these things then its still the same way.
>
> I also noticed that the note by oej only included one of the 3-4 things
> that I noticed werent right.
Hello everyone not sure if this is the correct list to use or not, I was
wondering if anyone is looking for a Asterisk tech or a web designer or
asterisk agi scripter (in php)
if anyone is looking please contact me off list and I will send you my
portfolio website
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 8:34 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 08:22:58PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> > Look you two, you are both very valuable members of this community.
>
> Well, I'm flattered, but you may give me too much credit. Nonetheless,
> Bret's
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 23:54 -0400, Peter Beckman wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
>
> > dtmf in asterisk (rfc2833) violates the rfc. There are many switches
> > that usually are only "big carrier types" that do not properly deal with
> > what asterisk sends. I gave o
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 08:22:58PM -0400, Steve Totaro wrote:
> Look you two, you are both very valuable members of this community.
Well, I'm flattered, but you may give me too much credit. Nonetheless,
Bret's in my kill file, and I'm done with it.
Cheers,
- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 8:11 PM, Jay R. Ashworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 01:50:04AM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 19:38 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > > where you continued to decline to answer in favor of handwaving.
> > >
> > O
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 02:08:58AM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> I dont think its that clear, because I am not the one throwing tantrums
> because someone failed to justify their feelings. Nor am I the one
> saying that someone is defensive by suggesting that this is not the
> proper ve
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 01:50:04AM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 19:38 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> > where you continued to decline to answer in favor of handwaving.
> >
> Ok, it was about my opinion, why do you feel that you can demand an
> explanation of my f
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 19:56 -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith (lists) wrote:
> On April 3, 2008 07:50:04 pm Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > Ok, it was about my opinion, why do you feel that you can demand an
> > explanation of my feelings on an off topic subject?
>
> You're the one who opened the subje
On April 3, 2008 07:50:04 pm Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> Ok, it was about my opinion, why do you feel that you can demand an
> explanation of my feelings on an off topic subject?
You're the one who opened the subject. He asked. I'm actually pretty curious
too. You decline to answer, he ca
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 19:38 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> where you continued to decline to answer in favor of handwaving.
>
Ok, it was about my opinion, why do you feel that you can demand an
explanation of my feelings on an off topic subject?
> My observation of the last 30 years of Unix de
On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 06:15:06PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> > On the other hand, it may be that you're complaining about *having to
> > assign your copyright to Digium*, which would be an entirely different
> > issue: you would be unhappy that they could then themselves dual-license
Kristian,
I completely pulled a my-bad and posted to the users list instead of
biz. I even had re-posted to the biz list and apologized for the
mix-up. :-)
To answer you question, we do not modify Asterisk in any way. The source
is the same as one would download directly from Digium (1.2 branch
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 12:07 -0400, Michael Jerris wrote:
> On Apr 3, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
>
> >
> > But take heart, freeswitch has the same problem, and they are also
> > unwilling to fix the same issue because "it goes the wrong direction",
> > although my thoughts
I also wouldnt/cant contribute to GPL licensed software, due to personal
reasons and well restrictions set by employers at times. I actually avoid
all use of GPL software in development whenever possible which is 90% of the
time. My preference is when it comes to using software, well for customers
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 11:46 -0400, Jay R. Ashworth wrote:
> Just curious why you look at it that way, Bret.
>
> The only reason I could see why someone would decline to contribute
> to a GPLd project would seem to be handily dealt with merely by
> dual-licensing your code GPL and BSD.
>
You sug
On Apr 3, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
>
> But take heart, freeswitch has the same problem, and they are also
> unwilling to fix the same issue because "it goes the wrong direction",
> although my thoughts at the time that was said was they didnt
> understand
> nor care t
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 10:30:29PM +0200, Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
> dtmf in asterisk (rfc2833) violates the rfc. There are many switches
> that usually are only "big carrier types" that do not properly deal with
> what asterisk sends. I gave oej specifics as he was doing something
> relat
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 18:01 +0300, Alexander Argov wrote:
> The new version is faster, Admin can see call route, supporting GSM,
> WEV, WEV compressed files.
The demo on your site still says 1.06. Will this be updated soon so we
can see the new functionality?
Bob
Hi John,
I think my history is well documented within the asterisk community that
moving Asterisk out of the geek zone and into the mainstream business
space is good for everyone.
It's good for customers, and it's good for programmers looking for
funding for the next generation of Asterisk tools
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 23:54 -0400, Peter Beckman wrote:
> Why don't you release your patch under a different license, so I can patch
> it separately from Asterisk? I can make modifications to Asterisk, I
> don't have to make them public.
it really isnt that hard for anyone to replicate it,
Hi all
We released a new version of the CRI.
The new version is faster, Admin can see call route, supporting GSM, WEV,
WEV compressed files.
Download from: http://www.tikalnetworks.com
Alex
___
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-
25 matches
Mail list logo
