> The issue says:
If a User Group is created for IM users we should add by default
the Personal assistant IM User, "MyAssistant", to that IM User
Group by default. This would save every IM user adding the
"MyAssistant" PA IM user as a buddy
> I don't think this is a good way to solve that problem.
> Putting a user into a group affects more than just whether or not that
identity is allowed to send me messages - it also affects where that
user > appears in my buddy list. The users that appear in the
server-defined groups cannot be moved out of those groups or hidden.
> Conceptually, the MyAssistant is not in fact a member of those groups
- for example, in our alpha trial system I'm in a server-defined group >
"SCSDesignTeam" - MyAssistant is not a member of the SCS Design Team, so
having it organized in my buddy list as one is unhelpful.
> I don't see why the problem of allowing the MyAsssistant bot to send
me messages shouldn't be handled in exactly the way letting any user
send me > messages is handled - it requests permission and I grant it
through my IM client. At most, we need a button in the user portal I
can push to > trigger the MyAssistant asking for that permission.
I think it is a good point to have a checkbox in the user portal, to
allow user to add/remove MyAssistant as a buddy, and enabled by default.
This will trigger a XMPP request underneath to update the user's roster.
In that case, by default, user does not need to add MyAssist manually,
and user also has choice to disable it. With this, it also does not have
a side effect you pointed out above when adding MyAssist at group level.
Thoughts?
Huijun
_______________________________________________
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/
