Re: Kannel SMPP interface !

Then probably separation ppg/pure wap pull would be useful, too.
I think we can freeze after a new release, that would certainly be ok
for me.

Aarno

On Tuesday, June 10, 2003, at 11:12 AM, Alex Judd wrote:

> No, I think Stipe's on about the discussions to build a more module 
> based
> build with bearerbox forming the core - ie.
>
>            - smsbox
>            - wapbox
> bearerbox  - smppbox
>            - etc.
>
> if we split the modules out a little cleaner like this, then you can
> checkout just the base and the module you want.
>
> It shouldn't be a big job, just need to freeze a cvs branch while 
> someone
> starts it would be my thoughts. It would be a good incentive to get 
> Wapme to
> let loose the smppbox they've got chained there :)
>
> Alex
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Aarno Syvänen" <[email protected]>
> To: "Stipe Tolj" <[email protected]>
> Cc: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 9:48 AM
> Subject: Re: Kannel SMPP interface !
>
>
>> You mean making cvs modules located in different machines ?
>>
>> Aarno
>>
>> On Sunday, June 8, 2003, at 01:53 PM, Stipe Tolj wrote:
>>
>>> yes there is. We at Wapme have those beasts arround here still in
>>> cages ;)
>>>
>>> Reason: We need a modularized configure/make process to have them
>>> hooked in cleanly and keep them seperated in own cvs modules.
>>>
>>> So could some people *please* think of how to handle configure/make 
>>> of
>>> "external" cvs modules with the gateway cvs module as base core.
>>>
>>> Stipe
>>>
>>> [email protected]
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Wapme Systems AG
>>>
>>> Vogelsanger Weg 80
>>> 40470 Düsseldorf
>>>
>>> Tel: +49-211-74845-0
>>> Fax: +49-211-74845-299
>>>
>>> E-Mail: [email protected]
>>> Internet: http://www.wapme-systems.de
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> wapme.net - wherever you are
>>>
>>
>