On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 12:48:46PM -0700, Robert Hajime Lanning wrote:
>
> http://www.0xdecafbad.com";>
> > Protecting freedoms by putting limits on (thus restricting freedoms).
> > Interesting concept.
>
> It maybe an interesting concept, but it is absolutely true.
> True anarchy (no rules what
Hi List.
I think we as users have a choice to look at this a bit differently.
You as a user, consultant or reseller of asterisk services, simply have
more options here. It also makes it much easier to implement asterisk
in the enterprise to be able to provide it with guaranteed support.
I for my
http://www.0xdecafbad.com";>
> Protecting freedoms by putting limits on (thus restricting freedoms).
> Interesting concept.
It maybe an interesting concept, but it is absolutely true.
True anarchy (no rules what so ever) cannot exist.
Your freedom to kill me would impose on my freedom to live.
On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 18:20 +0200, Esben Stien wrote:
> "trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com"; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Protecting freedoms by putting limits on (thus restricting
> > freedoms). Interesting concept.
>
> I need to repeat here. The gpl's purpose is to protect the freedoms
>
"trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com"; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Protecting freedoms by putting limits on (thus restricting
> freedoms). Interesting concept.
I need to repeat here. The gpl's purpose is to protect the freedoms
that comes with free software. So, you have only the freedoms that
c
On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 22:05 +0200, Esben Stien wrote:
> "trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com"; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Limits increase this freedom? I dont understand how placing limits
> > on its use increases its freedom, could you please explain that to
> > me?
>
> The "limits" are pu
"trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com"; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Limits increase this freedom? I dont understand how placing limits
> on its use increases its freedom, could you please explain that to
> me?
The "limits" are put on people to ensure that the software stays free;
that's a big par
On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 17:58 +0200, Esben Stien wrote:
> "Kevin P. Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Please read the text of the Digium Asterisk contribution disclaimers
> > before making incorrect statements like this.
>
> Yes, sorry, my wording was incorrect. You still have the code you
"Kevin P. Fleming" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Please read the text of the Digium Asterisk contribution disclaimers
> before making incorrect statements like this.
Yes, sorry, my wording was incorrect. You still have the code you've
written and it's still free, but you give digium the right to
Esben Stien wrote:
Yes, because digium has a dual license, you have to give up your
copyright if you submit code to the project. This makes it possible to
release a non free version in addition to the free one.
Please read the text of the Digium Asterisk contribution disclaimers
before making
On Sat, 2005-06-11 at 12:44 -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> On Saturday 11 June 2005 12:12, Esben Stien wrote:
> > It means the project will receive less contribution from free software
> > developers. I certainly would not give up my copyright on free
> > software so that someone else could relea
On Saturday 11 June 2005 12:12, Esben Stien wrote:
> It means the project will receive less contribution from free software
> developers. I certainly would not give up my copyright on free
> software so that someone else could release it as non free software.
Only to those who agree with your view
Andrew Kohlsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't know, I've got no problem with them dual-licensing it.
It means the project will receive less contribution from free software
developers. I certainly would not give up my copyright on free
software so that someone else could release it as no
William Waites <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> So this is a version of Asterisk that is released by Digium but
> is not released under the GPL. Correct?
Yes, because digium has a dual license, you have to give up your
copyright if you submit code to the project. This makes it possible to
release a
I understand and agree with Digium on the ABE. I have worked with C level execs
that only care about "mitigation" (AKA not their problem if it breaks)
and warranties.
This is just Asterisk in a shinny make you feel good box with phone support.
On 6/6/05, Andrew Kohlsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wr
On Monday 06 June 2005 17:11, William Waites wrote:
> If you're interested, take a closer look. chan_sip.c, some time ago.
> Miscellaneous bug fixes. But a whole lot, and not for a long time.
I stand corrected; thanks for taking me to task on it. :-)
> The reason for the "not for a long time" is
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 05:11:42PM -0400, William Waites wrote:
>
> If you're interested, take a closer look. chan_sip.c, some time ago.
> Miscellaneous bug fixes. But a whole lot, and not for a long time.
^^
should read "not a whole lot". argh.
73
-w
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 03:31:31PM -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
>
> > So Digium has leveraged the community to build for them a
> > proprietary product. Correct?
> >
> > Nice.
>
> Others have commented on this, so I'll refrain short of saying you need some
> serious clue. I'm not sure I see y
On Monday 06 June 2005 13:29, William Waites wrote:
> So this is a version of Asterisk that is released by Digium but
> is not released under the GPL. Correct?
Not quite. This is a specific set of CVS with NO NEW FEATURES that is not
released under GPL.
There is nothing in ABE that is not also
William Waites wrote:
So Digium has leveraged the community to build for them a
proprietary product. Correct?
Nice.
Give me a break.
Digium has Open-Sourced their primary intellectual property and given it
to the community. They spend a good portion of their corporate cashflow
on prog
On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 12:20:13PM -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> On Monday 06 June 2005 11:25, William Waites wrote:
> > So is there at least a cvs tag? Can I "cvs co -r ABE asterisk"?
>
> Honestly, what part of "the source is not available" do you have trouble
> comprehending?
Sorry, due to
On Monday 06 June 2005 11:25, William Waites wrote:
> So is there at least a cvs tag? Can I "cvs co -r ABE asterisk"?
Honestly, what part of "the source is not available" do you have trouble
comprehending?
-A.
___
Asterisk-Users mailing list
Asterisk-U
On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 10:06:02PM -0400, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> On Sunday 29 May 2005 20:59, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> > 1) Simply CVS head (as of some point in time) with certain features or
> >bug fixes "backed out"
> >
> > 2) In addition to CVS head, some important features and bug fixes.
>
Peter Nixon wrote:
Lets get our facts straight shall we. It appears that the FIRST ever hardware
suported by Asterisk was Sangoma ;-)
Well, Sangoma Frame-Relay hardware, that's true... I was thinking purely
of TDM voice hardware, sorry for the confusion. It's been an exceedingly
long time si
On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, Peter Nixon wrote:
> On Monday 30 May 2005 13:28, Matteo Brancaleoni wrote:
> > and , what is more interesting,
> > they've omitted any reference to digium resellers
> > and specified only distributors :(
>
> Yes. Our reseller info was removed. And some of our customers have b
On Monday 30 May 2005 13:28, Matteo Brancaleoni wrote:
> and , what is more interesting,
> they've omitted any reference to digium resellers
> and specified only distributors :(
Yes. Our reseller info was removed. And some of our customers have been sold
to directly.. Not a nice way to do busines
On Monday 06 June 2005 02:50, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
--snip--
> > I've just not been impressed with Digium's behaviour lately. They've
> > gotten quite hostile over Sangoma hardware lately, claiming that Sangoma
> > (by continuing to develop, refine, and expand their hardware lines,
> > which are
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
If they are "fixing" things in ABE that are broken in "Open Source", and
not simply backing out features, they why aren't these bug fixes in the
open source version?
As stated in my other reply, this is very much untrue. There are no
fixes applied to ABE (or new feature
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
In either case, since they are committed to the open source model, are
they willing to tell us what features/bug fixes in CVS are considered an
increased liability and risk, or what important features and bug fixes
they've applied on top of CVS? This could help those of us
* Andrew Kohlsmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [050529 21:07]:
> On Sunday 29 May 2005 20:59, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> > 1) Simply CVS head (as of some point in time) with certain features or
> >bug fixes "backed out"
> >
> > 2) In addition to CVS head, some important features and bug fixes.
>
> I think
Matteo Brancaleoni wrote:
and , what is more interesting,
they've omitted any reference to digium resellers
and specified only distributors :(
Yah that's kinda bad form. And seeing as I know for a fact that the
distributors will sell directly to my customers even though we're in
different co
and , what is more interesting,
they've omitted any reference to digium resellers
and specified only distributors :(
matteo
--
Matteo Brancaleoni
System Administrator
Tel +39.02.70633354
Sip [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Iax2 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Asterisk-User
Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
Browsing through the new website...
* Q - Does Asterisk Business Edition contain any additional features, fixes,
or enhancements not found in the open source versions of Asterisk?
* A - Digium remains committed to the open source model, and has based
Asterisk B
On Sunday 29 May 2005 20:59, Aidan Van Dyk wrote:
> 1) Simply CVS head (as of some point in time) with certain features or
>bug fixes "backed out"
>
> 2) In addition to CVS head, some important features and bug fixes.
I think it's simply #2. They are taking HEAD and maintaining a version wher
Browsing through the new website...
* Q - Does Asterisk Business Edition contain any additional features, fixes,
or enhancements not found in the open source versions of Asterisk?
* A - Digium remains committed to the open source model, and has based
Asterisk Business Edition entire
35 matches
Mail list logo
