On Sat, Sep 20, 2014 at 11:21 AM, Joshua Colp <jc...@digium.com> wrote:

> George Joseph wrote:
> <snip>
>>     5. The idea of higher level concept configuration has been thrown
>>     around as something to make this easier. I personally think this
>>     sort of thing belongs there. A type=trunk, itsp, phone, etc. Lower
>>     level blocks remain the same and additional logic on top can be
>>     added to handle this sort of thing.
>> Are you thinking like users.conf?  I thought you guys wanted that to die
>> a horrible death. :)   Seriously though, are you thinking along the
>> lines of a new composite pjsip configuration object that creates the
>> base objects behind the scenes?   If so, that'd solve a lot and I could
>> start working on it right now.  I just thought you guys were shying away
>> from these types of things.
> As base objects it's a bad idea. As a single object to rule them all (a
> user) it's also a complicated/bad idea. As higher level concepts which
> represent things that people are familiar with they're fine.
> Since endpoint really contains most of the detailed config parameters,
would you see enhancements to endpoint that allow direct specification of
simple things like username, password, contact, etc.  or really a separate
object like trunk, user, etc.?   I'm guessing the latter but the former
would be a lot easier to implement.
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:

Reply via email to