Re: [PATCH] Database SMSC driver

hi,

no problem but then we have at least try to share code with sqlbox and don't try reinvent the wheel. So the user will have advantage and possibility to
switch between sql smsc module and sqlbox without extra tasks needed.

Because otherwise we duplicate code and that make maintenance not so easy task for us.

Thanks,
Alexander Malysh

Am 18.03.2011 um 13:51 schrieb Stipe Tolj:

> Am 18.03.2011 10:06, schrieb Donald Jackson:
>> Hey Alex,
>> 
>> I think anything is 'possible' but this SMSC was written specifically to make it easier for users to implement such a scenario. Asking these types of users to now configure loop backs, a sqlbox and more doesn't make it an easy task for them.
> 
> I agree here to Donald. Complex setups are possible with the board-tools we have
> in Kannel, but if we can make things EASY and even more flexible within the
> architecture, we SHOULD do it.
> 
>> The reason I like this solution is it makes it easy for users to implement and it doesn't impact the gateway negatively being a separate SMSC module (ie, use it if you want it).
> 
> correc, it's simply ONE additional SMSC module. User's decide if they NEED it,
> we PROVIDE it ;)
> 
> Stipe
> 
> -- 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kölner Landstrasse 419
> 40589 Düsseldorf, NRW, Germany
> 
> tolj.org system architecture      Kannel Software Foundation (KSF)
> http://www.tolj.org/              http://www.kannel.org/
> 
> mailto:st_{at}_tolj.org           mailto:stolj_{at}_kannel.org
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>