4 Mar
2011
4 Mar
'11
9:31 a.m.
Sylvain,
thanks for your feedback.
On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 08:22:38AM +0100, Sylvain Munaut wrote:
good spot, I've re-deleted it.
good.
ok, will do that.
'core network' in GSM means MSC/HLR/VLR/AuC/SMSC but explicitly not the BSC,
which is part of the 'radio access netowrk'. So osmo-corenet would be another
mis-nomer. osmo-gsm-net may make sense, though.
ok. I just think the _hack suffix is no longer really appropriate and might
deter/confuse some users who are not as adventurous as we are ;)
--
- Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
"Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option."
(ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
And the first
steps in reorganizing directories and makefiles is
available at
http://cgit.osmocom.org/cgit/openbsc/log/?h=laforge/new_structure
Mmm, you remove the unused a3a8 code and you re-add it when doing all
the git-mv one commit later. I assume it's a manip slip-up. What do you
generally think of this?
Well, IMHO all clean up is good and the structure you laid out makes
sense to me. Why import the BTS code ?
Since it's new code, doesn't it make sense to make it directly
separate and "well behaved".
My idea was to import it as there is some shared code on the Abis side for
RSL and OML message construction (as well as TLV parser definitions) and
RTP / TRAU handling. Furthermore, once we'll later start to do GPRS in the
BTS, the Gb protocol stack from src/gb/ will also be used in the BTS itself.
But we could just as well use those reasons to make a real 'libosmo-abis.so'
either from within openbsc.git or yet another repository. The BTS code could
then stay independent and simply link against that library.
So that'll be pretty big all by itself.
Yes, I tend to agree. Keep that seperate and link against abis/trau/gb
libraries.
Some random
ideas:
* prefix the library directories with 'lib', i.e. 'libbsc',
'libmsc' to
clearly state this is not a program but just library code
Yes definitly. They already generate libmsc.a and libbsc.a if I'm not
mistaken, so it would only be logical to name the directories as such. * rename the
openbsc repository to smething more generic. but what?
I don't think we want to create multiple repositories but keep
everything in a single repo - at least until one of the sub-libraries
is self-contained enough.
osmo-gsm-net (or corenet) ? This seems to be all all the 'network side' stuff.
* should we
keep bsc_hack instead of osmo-nitb? (network-in-the-box)?
or should it rather be called osmo-niab (network-in-a-box)?
Nah, a rename shouldn't be much of an issue IMHO.