On 3/19/15 11:15 PM, John Nemeth wrote:
The following reply was made to PR pkg/49661; it has been noted by GNATS.
I'm certainly willing to consider your request. However, I'm
wondering why you don't just use ODBC? I'm using that to access
MySQL (in a variety of ways), and I find it works quite well. It
would also be more flexible. I am trying to avoid a proliferation
of options. But, if it is something you really need, I certainly
am willing to do stuff to encourage greater use of Asterisk on
NetBSD.
BTW, is it working well for you? I've been using comms/asterisk18
in production, but that is getting long in the tooth, and it is
time to move forward.
Hi John, Thank you for the response, and thank you for your efforts on the package.Interesting that you see it as keeping options slim, while on our side we treat it as a reduced dependency tree, and less points of configuration. I'm interested to know what drives that angle, since I've previously made a point of supporting many ./configure tunables via options when I write our packages internally. I tend to see it as if the overarching project supports it, it's not for the handy-wrapper to pick and choose what the end user should or should not do; short of platform specific limitations or incompatibilities. (Or perhaps glaring bad-practices.)
I'm not suggesting one option being superior to the other, and certainly default to your judgement as the maintainer.
As luck should have it, it sounds like we're in much the same boat as you seem to be. We have a pair of 1.8 systems which have been in production for going on four years now, which we're carefully preparing to transition over to the current version. We'll definitely be keeping the 1.8 systems near-line for a while after the transition.
Best, Mike.