My vote for the renaming. It is very confusing to have mediaproxy-ng + rtpproxy | rtpproxy-ng modules, when you also have mediaproxy module and rtpproxy-proxy and mediaproxy-proxy, IYKWIM.

Regards,


On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Juha Heinanen <jh@tutpro.com> wrote:
Richard Fuchs writes:

> We're slowly getting ready for a new major release of mediaproxy-ng
> (3.x), which will include some exciting new features, most importantly
> much improved support for WebRTC. To support those features, rtpproxy-ng
> needs to support additional flags for the offer/answer functions.

This is great news.  In my opinion it would be better to rename
rtpproxy-ng module rather than leave its existing version hanging there,
because I'm sure that current users of the module will migrate to the
new one anyhow.

-- Juha

_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
sr-dev@lists.sip-router.org
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev



--
Carlos
http://caruizdiaz.com
http://ngvoice.com
+595981146623