Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 2:16 pm Post subject: [Bristuff-users] Patch for BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b to support sn
Hi all,
BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b (and possibly in earlier versions, too), all the code
necessary to update the callerid on snom phones after an attended transfer
(using "message/sipfrag"; as available in BRIstuff 0.3.0-PRE-1y-p, improved
in 0.3.0-PRE-1y-r) is there, but it's commented out, unfortunately.
The attached patch (121-sip_changes.diff.patch) removes the comments from the
few relevant lines in file patches/asterisk/121-sip_changes.diff ,
121-sip_changes.diff is the patched version from BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b.
Additionally, I've changed the two lines so that both, caller id name and
number are shown. This change might also be interresting for BRIstuff 0.3 /
Asterisk 1.2.
The patch is somewhat tested with snom 320s firmware version 7.1.33. I'll see
that I can also test the BRIstuff 0.3 / Asterisk 1.2 version of it with snom
320s and 360s during the next days/weeks.
Any chance of getting this change into BRIstuff 0.4? (Who do I have to contact
to request this?)
Best regards,
Philipp
--
Philipp Walker
Binatec AG
Ingenieurbüro für Nachrichten- und Informationstechnik
Q4 Altdorf Ost
Hellgasse 23 / Postfach
6460 Altdorf
Posted: Mon Jul 07, 2008 3:07 pm Post subject: [Bristuff-users] Patch for BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b to support sn
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 05:16:20PM +0200, Philipp Walker wrote:
Quote:
Hi all,
BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b (and possibly in earlier versions, too), all the code
necessary to update the callerid on snom phones after an attended transfer
(using "message/sipfrag"; as available in BRIstuff 0.3.0-PRE-1y-p, improved
in 0.3.0-PRE-1y-r) is there, but it's commented out, unfortunately.
The attached patch (121-sip_changes.diff.patch) removes the comments from the
few relevant lines in file patches/asterisk/121-sip_changes.diff ,
121-sip_changes.diff is the patched version from BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b.
Additionally, I've changed the two lines so that both, caller id name and
number are shown. This change might also be interresting for BRIstuff 0.3 /
Asterisk 1.2.
The patch is somewhat tested with snom 320s firmware version 7.1.33. I'll see
that I can also test the BRIstuff 0.3 / Asterisk 1.2 version of it with snom
320s and 360s during the next days/weeks.
Any chance of getting this change into BRIstuff 0.4? (Who do I have to contact
to request this?)
Junghanns?
Seriously, though:
Bristuff has many useful fixes. But those never get upstream. And thus
it is a problem to rely on them. Any thoughts on how to better work with
them?
I have been able to communicate with the author, but on a very
non-regular basis. Though he does produce useful code and does respond
to fixes (RC3b includes a libpri fix of ours, but not some small zaptel
svn backport patches we need).
I'm not sure I understand the need for a separate "send_message" channel
operation. And I don't understand the need for the dialplan/prefix
operations in chan_sip.
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 05:16:20PM +0200, Philipp Walker wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b (and possibly in earlier versions, too), all the code
> necessary to update the callerid on snom phones after an attended transfer
> (using "message/sipfrag"; as available in BRIstuff 0.3.0-PRE-1y-p, improved
> in 0.3.0-PRE-1y-r) is there, but it's commented out, unfortunately.
>
> The attached patch (121-sip_changes.diff.patch) removes the comments from the
> few relevant lines in file patches/asterisk/121-sip_changes.diff ,
> 121-sip_changes.diff is the patched version from BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b.
> Additionally, I've changed the two lines so that both, caller id name and
> number are shown. This change might also be interresting for BRIstuff 0.3 /
> Asterisk 1.2.
>
> The patch is somewhat tested with snom 320s firmware version 7.1.33. I'll see
> that I can also test the BRIstuff 0.3 / Asterisk 1.2 version of it with snom
> 320s and 360s during the next days/weeks.
> Any chance of getting this change into BRIstuff 0.4? (Who do I have to contact
> to request this?)
Junghanns?
Seriously, though:
Bristuff has many useful fixes. But those never get upstream. And thus
it is a problem to rely on them. Any thoughts on how to better work with
them?
I have been able to communicate with the author, but on a very
non-regular basis. Though he does produce useful code and does respond
to fixes (RC3b includes a libpri fix of ours, but not some small zaptel
svn backport patches we need).
I'm not sure I understand the need for a separate "send_message" channel
operation. And I don't understand the need for the dialplan/prefix
operations in chan_sip.
I have found GITHub to be a useful resource for community efforts of
this kind. I have started working with the astmanproxy maintainer - He
imported the project into GIT, and I was able to "fork" (a bit like
CVS or SVN branches) and modify my own version. Later when this was
stable and useful it was merged back to the original master tree so
that people know it was "sanctioned". In the meantime, my tree is open
for anyone to download my "fork".
bristuff seems to be 100% GPLv2, so it should be perfectly okay to
have a community repository in GIT.
Anyone? GIT is conceptually quite unusual, so if you need an
introduction, this page helped me:
Posted: Tue Jul 08, 2008 8:24 am Post subject: [Bristuff-users] Patch for BRIstuff 0.4.0-RC3b to support sn
Quote:
I have found GITHub to be a useful resource for community efforts of
this kind. I have started working with the astmanproxy maintainer - He
imported the project into GIT, and I was able to "fork" (a bit like
CVS or SVN branches) and modify my own version. Later when this was
stable and useful it was merged back to the original master tree so
that people know it was "sanctioned". In the meantime, my tree is open
for anyone to download my "fork".
bristuff seems to be 100% GPLv2, so it should be perfectly okay to
have a community repository in GIT.
Anyone? GIT is conceptually quite unusual, so if you need an
introduction, this page helped me:
I should have said, in the ideal world, Junghanns would run the
top-level master, but given the hard work put into it by Xorcom, I
would personally be happy to see Tzafrir/Xorcom taking on that role :)
You can post new topics in this forum You can reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
