-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3816/#review12730
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


A few minor logging related things that were moved, but I combed through this a 
few times and it looks proper.


/trunk/main/bridge_basic.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3816/#comment23038>

    Should this be a NOTICE log message?  It appears to occur kind of deeply 
and might be better as debug.



/trunk/main/bridge_basic.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3816/#comment23039>

    debug instead of notice log?



/trunk/main/bridge_basic.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3816/#comment23037>

    debug instead of notice log?


- Jonathan Rose


On July 17, 2014, 1:01 p.m., Mark Michelson wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3816/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated July 17, 2014, 1:01 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Repository: Asterisk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Transfer publications in Stasis have, in the past given transferer channels 
> and the bridges they belong to. The theory behind this is that if given that 
> information, and you have kept track of who all has entered and left the 
> associated bridges, you can derive who the transferee channels are and who 
> the transfer target channels are. In practice, however, it's more useful to 
> present this information directly in the publication.
> 
> This changeset adds transferee channel snapshots to blind and attended 
> transfer publications and a transfer target channel snapshot to the blind 
> transfer publication. We only provide such snapshots if there is a single 
> transferee or transfer target. If transferring multiple parties or 
> transferring to multiple parties, these snapshots are omitted.
> 
> One thing to check for is whether consumers of the transfer events have been 
> properly updated to make use of the new information being added in this 
> review (I'm looking at you, ARI!).
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /trunk/res/stasis/app.c 418633 
>   /trunk/main/stasis_bridges.c 418633 
>   /trunk/main/cel.c 418633 
>   /trunk/main/bridge_basic.c 418633 
>   /trunk/main/bridge.c 418633 
>   /trunk/include/asterisk/stasis_bridges.h 418633 
>   /trunk/apps/app_queue.c 418633 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3816/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Testing on this is pretty paltry at the moment. All I have done is to perform 
> manual tests of nominal cases. I can confirm that AMI now prints transferee 
> channel information for both blind and attended transfers. I can also confirm 
> that AMI prints transfer target information for attended transfers.
> 
> Due to the looming deadline of the feature freeze, plus the stipulation that 
> the code only needs to be up for review to be a candidate for inclusion, I 
> have posted this without any testsuite tests. This will not be committed 
> without either modifying existing tests or adding new tests, though.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Mark Michelson
> 
>

-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Reply via email to