Re: [PATCH] curl

Kalle Marjola wrote:

>>right. That was the main intention of the clause. I don't see an active reason 
>>to remove it. Seeing the clause in such a context in legitim and holds still 
>>with current policy on how to add optional features, IMO.
>>
>>
>>>Maybe Kalle could shed some light on the matter.
>>
>>yep, Kalle may know it best. ;)
>>
> 
> I could say that Lasu knows best :]
> By digging deep into my memories and doing some deductive thinking, I'd
> say this is because if there is optional modules, automatic checking and
> keeping it all working is a nightmare. Even one optional module means
> that all tests should be done 2 times (once without module, once with
> the module). With 3 optional modules, tests should be run 2^3 (8) times
> whenever core is changed, and 4 times if certain module is changed.
> 
> 
> However, on this entire subject, Kannel has always had this problem of
> being tied to certain decisions and having problems adopting to new
> needs.. Full ahead with core changes which are needed for better
> dlr/sending support I say - even if this would require us to have like 
> 2 different supported 'stable' releases (like 1.4 and 1.6)

ok, this reas like +1 for adding optional libcurl support, right?

> (but also full -600 to any new high-level feature adds (ringtones,
> wallpapers, whatever), as they should be outside Kannel)

agreed.

Stipe

mailto:stolj_{at}_wapme.de
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wapme Systems AG

Vogelsanger Weg 80
40470 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany

phone: +49.211.74845.0
fax: +49.211.74845.299

mailto:info_{at}_wapme-systems.de
http://www.wapme-systems.de/
-------------------------------------------------------------------