I expect the typical scenario is a shared line between users and not necessarily a sharing of all lines for a given user. It may be that person A has a line shared with person B, but either, or both have another unshared line. This should be available.
This suggests that 1) is the preferred approach. To get around Paul's concern ideally there's a sipXconfig solution to allow all 'ends' of the shared line to be defined at the same time. Also this shouldn't be restricted to just two persons sharing the same line. I'm not sure what the practial limits may be, but at least three users should be able to share the same line. wrt the Polycom config information, I agree this is 'extra' config info and something that we should look to make invisible in the GUI (not remove from Config, as there may become a future need to access it). -----Original Message----- From: Beeton, Carolyn (CAR:9D60) Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 9:37 AM To: Mossman, Paul (CAR:9D30); [email protected] Subject: Re: [sipX-dev] Config for bridged line appearances (XX-4762/XX-5439) > -----Original Message----- > From: Mossman, Paul (CAR:9D30) > Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 9:32 AM > To: Beeton, Carolyn (CAR:9D60); [email protected] > Subject: RE: [sipX-dev] Config for bridged line appearances > (XX-4762/XX-5439) > > Carolyn wrote: > ... > > > As you write there are 2 ways to do it: > > > (1) "shared" is an attribute of the line > > > (2) "shared" is an attribute of the user > > > > > > (1) has the advantage of being able to configure shared and > > non-shared > > > appearance and it will also be possible for sipXconfig to clearly > > > demonstrate if "shared line" > > > functionality is available for the specific lines > > > (2) has the advantage of being easier to configure - one > > click and all > > > user's accounts (acttually all on the phones that support > > it) become > > > shared > > > > > > I am OK with either approach. Can anyone tell a story that would > > > clearly demonstrate that one is better than the other? > > > > > > > > > > The problem with (1) is that it takes two to share. If you add the > > BossUser as a line on the Admin's set, and mark it as "shared", you > > get nowhere. You have to go to the Boss's set and mark it > as "shared" > > there as well. So I vote for (2). > > +1 > > If it doesn't make sense for all lines to be shared by default, then > (2) is easier to configure. > > You will change the Polycom thirdPartyName and type attributes to > "hidden"? > who, me? :-) That's up to the config folks. We seem to expose a lot of low-level Polycom stuff. We could set the fields based on the "shared" setting, but allow them to be over-ridden, or make them read-only, or we could hide them. No opinion here. Carolyn _______________________________________________ sipx-dev mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-dev sipXecs IP PBX -- http://www.sipfoundry.org/
