From: David B. <da...@ra...> - 2011-08-25 15:03:46
|
Fabio - Forgive my ignorance, but just what have *you* contributed to either branch of OpenBTS? -- David On Aug 25, 2011, at 12:29 AM, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) wrote: > Ok but: > > If on "Official" sources we will see mention about OpenBTS-UHD with a > clear statement that all opensource contribution should go to > OpenBTS-UHD i would be happy. > > Otherwise i would try to allocate some hour during one night of next > week to: > > * Explain about OpenBTS-UHD on all internet-sources i can find > (wikipedia, voip-info, freeswitch, blog comment, etc) > > * Register a domain about OpenBTS-UHD (i prefer you to do it) > > * Setup an open-mediawiki providing basic and short, reference about it, > at least explaining the situation (that new adopter should go to > OpenBTS-UHD) > > * Use 50$ of free google-ad i have from my hosting to setup OpenBTS > google adv > > At least new users will just have the right reference of what to look at > when they search for OpenBTS and they know that: > - They need to use OpenBTS-UHD > - If they use OpenBTS-UHD they can spend less money > > I apologies for Trolling, but as already stated in past, i absolutely > doesn't like the approach of keeping of dual Open/Commercial handling. > > As an opensource advocacy troll i am just trying to make the inevitable > stuff happening earlier. > > -naif > > On 8/25/11 9:21 AM, Alexander Chemeris wrote: >> Fabio, >> >> Right now OpenBTS-UHD is still a branch, not fork. So to make people >> using it, we should just add some more visibility for it to the wiki >> and to Wikipedia. It would be nice to add mentions to >> http://openbts.sourceforge.net, but this it not critically necessary >> yet. >> >> Let me rephrase - to get OpenBTS working, people *must* read wiki. And >> that's the place where we can give them knowledge about OpenBTS-UHD. >> And we do this already, but in less insistently then we should >> probably do. >> >> On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 11:16, Fabio Pietrosanti (naif) >> <li...@in...> wrote: >>> If i go on google and search for "OpenBTS" you will find in first page: >>> >>> * http://openbts.sourceforge.net/ - NO mention to OpenBTS-UHD >>> * en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenBTS - NO mention to OpenBTS-UHD >>> * http://openbts.blogspot.com/ - NO mention do OpenBTS-UHD >>> * www.kestrelsp.com/OpenBTS.html - NO mention to OpenBTS-UHD >>> * kestrelsignalprocessing.mybigcommerce.com - NO mention to OpenBTS-UHD >>> >>> That means that a new adopter, that SHOULD use OpenBTS-UHD, will NOT be >>> able to find OpenBTS-UHD but will first start with plain OpenBTS. >>> >>> Plain OpenBTS is: >>> * more buggy >>> * less features >>> * with less hardware support >>> >>> So, my point is, shouldn't we think about making www.openbts-uhd.org so >>> that a new adopter will be able to start using OpenBTS-UHD instead of >>> the old, plain, OpenBTS public implementation? >>> >>> Currently OpenBTS-UHD doesn't have enough pubblicity and we should >>> recognize that: >>> * OpenBTS on sourceforge is dead >>> * OpenBTS-UHD on github is the new OpenBTS >>> >>> Maybe we should acknolwedge this publicly by allowing new-users to start >>> using UHD rather than the dead project. >>> >>> -naif >>> On 8/25/11 8:59 AM, Kurtis Heimerl wrote: >>>> I personally think that would be really really foolish. While it's >>>> true that the mainline branch is rotting and that feature additions >>>> are coming from a wider variety of people, that's not a great reason >>>> to fork the project completely. David (and the rest of the commercial >>>> guys) are still the best source of knowledge about the code and >>>> architecture. They're still friendly enough to respond to traffic on >>>> this list, helping everyone out. Lastly, the wiki has a lot of >>>> information and splitting that is needlessly wasteful. >>>> >>>> However, it is clear that there's a schism here that needs to be >>>> resolved. I can merge my own branch into the UHD branch pretty easily, >>>> and I do think it's the most feature complete open-source >>>> implementation. At some point, that code does does need to become the >>>> mainline branch. When and how that happens is a discussion that needs >>>> to happen. >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> EMC VNX: the world's simplest storage, starting under $10K >>> The only unified storage solution that offers unified management >>> Up to 160% more powerful than alternatives and 25% more efficient. >>> Guaranteed. http://p.sf.net/sfu/emc-vnx-dev2dev >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Openbts-discuss mailing list >>> Ope...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbts-discuss >>> >> >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > EMC VNX: the world's simplest storage, starting under $10K > The only unified storage solution that offers unified management > Up to 160% more powerful than alternatives and 25% more efficient. > Guaranteed. http://p.sf.net/sfu/emc-vnx-dev2dev > _______________________________________________ > Openbts-discuss mailing list > Ope...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/openbts-discuss David A. Burgess, CTO Range Networks, Inc. +17072082622 |