<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Hi guys. I'm just any other SER user in the world that I have taken
advantage of this project to deploy SIP service. I haven't contribute
with the project as far as I have tried to replay some posts at the
mailing list.<br>
<br>
There are many people that is dedicated and compromised with this
project. I have seen people like SER Team (Jiri, Jan and Andrei), Juha,
Marie, Bodgan, Daniel, Iqbal, Greger, Paul, and many others that have
been giving their time and effort to SER project without asking for a
compensation.<br>
<br>
The open source development philosophy goes in this way: Everybody
contributes with it and there isn't any payment (money) back. Then we
have a project like SER when there should be a leader for the benefit
and success of the project. There are rules and policies about how to
use the software, how to make the documentation, how to integrate the
improvements, new code, etc. and everybody should follow this rules and
policies. And what about the people that is dedicated 100% to the
project, how they are handling their incomes? Some body need to pay the
bills.<br>
<br>
I don't know about SER guys like Jan, Jiri and Andrei what other thinks
are they doing besides SER Project but I can imagine they have a lot
work to do at the project.<br>
<br>
I don't know this is true but I though the main concern about Bodgan
and Daniel is that SER development group aren't dedicating the 100% to
the project because they have as main target the iptelorg commercial
project. There are some post at the mailing list that have shown the
feelings from some people about it.<br>
<br>
I have seen many people that have posted improvements, corrections,
add-on, etc. They are asking to integrate their contributions to the
project but they haven't received a positive answer and that is not
motivate it for anybody. And maybe they start to feel like "Something
is wrong, why this guys are not taking my code? Is there other kind of
interest here?"<br>
<br>
Why you don't make an agreement about this? Why don't to make a
re-engineering at the SER team and define team groups by features or by
modules which the team leader and members could be as from iptel-group
as from any other organization?<br>
In this way you could have a decision maker by module or feature that
could decide what o when to integrate new code or features. Maybe you
could adopt the way like the IETF organization works.<br>
<br>
Maybe this could help to have a better communication and to improve the
time to release the new stable versions of SER.<br>
<br>
These are my personals thougths I would like everything goes well and
everybody be happy.It's a little difficult to approach this kind of
goal but with a little effort, tolerance and good will everything is
possible.<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
<br>
Alberto Cruz<br>
reticent wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid42AF1E6D.1@galaxytelecom.net">
<pre wrap="">Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Jun 14, 2005 at 20:10, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:bogdan@voice-system.ro"><bogdan@voice-system.ro></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi SER community,
there are almost two years from the last official SER release and things
do not promise too much right now. Not only that the progress stuck
somewhere on the way (rel 0.9.0 was started more than half a year ago),
but even any attempt to push thing forward seems to be denied - I tried
along with Daniel to push the release, but seems that not everybody
shares our and comunity's interest regarding the public part of SER -
upgrades were rolled back, new software contributions haven't found
their way in (like TLS and other new modules), modules maintained by
other developers are inaccessible.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
The release is delayed due to lack of time.
Current show stoppers were me reviewing the whole tcp code (after finding
a minor bug) and some radius makefile problem.
Forking ser is a very bad ideea and your exposed reason are far from
enough to motivate it.
Anyway anybody can cvs co -rrel_0_9_0 .
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->I agree, forking will have a negative effect on SER in the long-run by
reducing the amount of available resources (programmer time,
administrative time)
If there is a problem it should be worked out as a community instead of
forgoing the difficult task of enacting change (if you think somthing
needs to change) and simply creating a parallel project.
I think it is important that not every patch and module simply be added
to the project but put aside so that someone can review the code and
make sure it safe and integrates well.
I wouldn't say there has been a lack of progress just because there
hasn't been a stable release for some time, your own changlog can attest
to this, there has been many improvements.
I do agree, however, that there should be some facility it place to
centralize the development of unstable modules that may eventually be
included in the mainstream distribution or at least in a stable "addons"
package, so that work may progress more efficientely in those area's.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Unfortunately this is not a good environment if we what to have some
future progress for SER. And this is the main reason for starting a new
project called OpenSER - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openser.org">http://www.openser.org</a> .
It's called open because its most important attribute is its opening to
new ideas and contributions, fast developing and more involvement of the
comunity. Along with quality, the progress is the main concern.
We will continue to support and develop the SER project as much as so
far and as much as possible, but OpenSER will give the liberty for more.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">ser just got an experimental module repository for new stuff that is not
tested and/or not reviewed by a core developed (so that it can be added
to the ser main repository).
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">OpenSER serves the interest of all SER users and will not change its
purpose - as a fact I have the pleasure to announce its first release -
OpenSER 0.9.4. The web site offers a comprehensive listing of new
features and fixes - <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openser.org/index.php#features">http://www.openser.org/index.php#features</a>. For
people already familiar to SER 0.9.3, going to
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openser.org/diffs-0.9.0.php">http://www.openser.org/diffs-0.9.0.php</a> will be more helpful.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">Some of the changes listed in the diffs will break compatibility with
current ser configuration scripts. I wonder also when have you tested
all your changes.
Andrei
_______________________________________________
Serdev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Serdev@iptel.org">Serdev@iptel.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev">http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serdev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
_______________________________________________
Serusers mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Serusers@iptel.org">Serusers@iptel.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers">http://mail.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>