[Freeswitch-users] Stability vs Features

[Yossi Neiman]

Stability is a big issue for me too.  My background includes time in a 
military communications corps, and I do not tolerate systems that crash 
every other day (I'm not mentioning any other projects that we might 
know that do that...)


Yossi Neiman
Cartis Solutions, Inc. - http://www.cartissolutions.com


Vikram Rangnekar wrote:
> I agree that the modular nature of freeswitch allows for greater
> flexibility and probably stability. I put my thoughts to the list just
> so that everyone understands the great need for a super stable
> switch core and hopefully get more developers excited on that core
> part of Freeswitch.
>
> On 8/31/06, Brian West <brian.west at mac.com> wrote:
>   
>> On Aug 31, 2006, at 12:33 PM, Vikram Rangnekar wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> I assume the goal here is to develop a carrier grade soft-switch. I
>>> understand features are great but features would cost us. As we add
>>> features the stability would degrade. I agree that adding C# support
>>> is an intresting idea but do we really need it adding mono into
>>> FreeSwitch I understand its a great thing for C# developers but mono
>>> is not super-stable.
>>>
>>>       
>> Since mod_mono is a module you can leave it out and not chance any
>> stability issues if thats your choice.  We don't strong arm you into
>> a way of doing things. (ie we don't glue the lego bricks together)
>>
>>     
>>> I personal opinion is to work towards defining a minimum set of
>>> features that are absolutely critical and then making those features
>>> stable and relatively bug free.
>>>
>>>       
>> That is our goal also.  The core MUST be stable thats the bottom line.
>>
>> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4613750174577358330&q=cluecon
>>
>> That video is Anthony speaking about freeswitch at cluecon.  Just pay
>> attention to the audio.. the video is blurry.
>>
>>     
>>> In Freeswitch much of the features or protocol support is based on
>>> external libraries this can be a good thing and a bad thing too. Since
>>> each of those libraries would probably have bugs and that means making
>>> sure that those libraries are also actively maintained.
>>>       
>> Yes we do depend on external libs.  But we also push fixes and
>> changes back to those projects so that stays a two way street.  If
>> one becomes un-maintained we'll just take over on that and continue
>> with maintaining it.
>>
>> The bottom line is STABLE CORE.   The core will extend itself to
>> building features with ease once its complete.
>>
>> /b
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Freeswitch-users mailing list
>> Freeswitch-users at lists.freeswitch.org
>> http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/freeswitch-users
>> UNSUBSCRIBE:http://lists.freeswitch.org/mailman/options/freeswitch-users
>> http://www.freeswitch.org
>>
>>     
>
>
>