25 Jun
2009
25 Jun
'09
6:40 a.m.
On 06/24/2009 10:22 PM, Juha Heinanen wrote:
Daniel-Constantin Mierla writes:
well, I haven't seen such attitude and commitment when was about
updating the modules to compile with sip router or porting k tm or core
features. But suddenly because one decides alone to do some change,
others should work to fix it now. No, thanks. My list of volunteer work
is full of other more useful things at this time. Probably I am not the
best one to ask for more free contribution on useless aspects, besides
the fact makefile is not a strong point of me.
I believe I am not sitting aside at all and complaining to others to do
something for me. It got to this point because of how the rename action
was undertaken. Be sure I would have had same reaction if something else
would have been changed in the core affecting the project.
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://www.asipto.com/
Now happened with the name, but in the future one
can think of something
else, turning in a chaotic evolution, so we rather (and better) have it
clear from this point of time, otherwise makes no sense to continue.
daniel,
rather than complaining, work on the goal that allows you to change the
binary name and name used in the docs and scripts by changing MAIN_NAME in
Makefile.defs.