RE: Windows Kannel?

I'd guesstimate that work as two weeks hard programming labour (for a
single win32 proficient programmer - extend that by another week for
each extra men on the job).

--
Oded Arbel
m-Wise Inc.
[email protected]
(972)-67-340014
(972)-9-9581711 (ext: 116)

::..
Famous Last words 143-"Here kitty, kitty, kitty..."


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kalle Marjola [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 3:57 PM
> Cc: Kannel Developers
> Subject: Re: Windows Kannel?
> 
> 
> On Wed, 15 May 2002, Stipe Tolj wrote:
> 
> > Kalle Marjola wrote:
> > > 
> > > Yeah, I guess cygwin would be sufficient but some people 
> keep asking, can
> > > it be done without cygwin there - and I guess cygwin 
> isn't the most
> > > efficient one if we want to have high throughput
> > 
> > Cygwin is of course not as fast as a native port would be, but
> > comparing the burdons in porting this may be a good trade-off IMO.
> 
> Naturally, but those people keep asking me so I'd love to have some 
> estimation/etc. to base that opinion on :]  (like: a rought 
> guess is that 
>  3 man-months would be needed to do the porting, do you still 
> think it is 
>  worth it?)  (I personally know nothing about windows programming)
> 
> 
> -- 
>                   &kalle marjola
> 
> 
>