Hi,
I've been reading recent emails on the developers list and just wanted
to add my 2 cents:
While the AGI approach was never useful for my needs, I recently
finished 2 years of almost straight development time to develop a
full-fledged call answering solution and I would be VERY annoyed (to say
the least) if AMI was deprecated! While many people do web programming
due to it's simplicity, I find a C-based program is ALWAYS more
elegant. As such, AMI was the ONLY interface to Asterisk that was
useful to building the interface we needed (keep in mind that web socket
support for C-based applications is VERY poor! We've researched it for
another application & found that we were not able to do what we needed
it for!) & we are just starting to enjoy the benefits of the work. I'm
not saying web development doesn't have it's merits, as some
applications demand it, but in my opinion a C-based program is better
catered for someone using it 24-7. So please, if you want to deprecate
something, don't do so to AMI!
Note: While I'd have no problem myself with deprecating the dial-plan
(actually, if I didn't have to deal with it at all & the complexities of
requiring a channel to be in async AGI mode before issuing an AMI
command to it, then that would have very much simplified my
development!), I can understand why a lot of people would be adverse to
such a change.
In summary, I think having different ways of controlling Asterisk are
required, depending on the application:
- AMI for those wishing to interface with a more elegant C-based
application.
- Something like the dial plan for those wishing to use Asterisk as is,
without developing an external interface.
- ARI or AGI for web-based solutions (hence why deprecating AGI probably
wouldn't be negative, being that they are 2 solutions to the same
ends..but DEFINITELY keep the AMI as it's purpose/use is different).
Whatever you do, please keep the AMI interface!
Thank You!
On 10/28/2014 06:03 PM, Ben Langfeld wrote:
On 28 October 2014 19:47, Derek Andrew <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
What is the alternative to the dial plan? Is everyone talking
about getting rid of the statements like:
exten => s,1,
what is the alternative?
Remote applications based on APIs like ARI. This is the start of the
discussion, and please remember that nothing has been decided or even
presented as a robust plan yet. This is brain-storming.
Additionally, note that the original proposal was to deprecate AMI/AGI
in favour of ARI once it is feature complete with those protocols; an
entirely lesser change than the removal of the dialplan in its entirety.
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- 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
--
_____________________________________________________________________
-- 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
