Woof!

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:01:56 -0500, Arjun Nair <[email protected]> wrote:

> There really is no perfect solution around this problem. On one hand, if  
> sipXivr controls the data, then sipXconfig is dependent on it for  
> manipulating that data. And on the other hand, if sipXconfig is the one  
> controlling that data, then sipXivr is dependent on it for its full  
> functionality. I would prefer the former approach, simply because, IMO,  
> it's more probable that you'll get a system where sipXivr is disabled,  
> than a system where sipXconfig is disabled and sipXivr is enabled. Plus,  
> it adheres to our current model, where sipXconfig is the master of all  
> data.

Well, if sipXivr is disabled, what are users doing changing their active  
greeting? ;-)

Also, in this case it really isn't sipXconfig changing the active  
greeting, it's the user portal (which just currently happens to live  
inside sipXconfig).  The user portal was to start using the sipXivr  
RESTful interfaces for all access to voicemail information, (instead of  
directly manipulating anything inside the mailbox directory, or directly  
accessing POSTGRES) because it is supposed to be replaceable with other  
interfaces (such as rich clients or widgets).  This was the proposed  
method of divorcing sipXconfig from sipXivr, and the way forward to other  
types of voicemail interfaces to gain access to voicemail information.

You can of change course, and reach your own conclusions, but that was the  
reasoning behind adding the RESTful interfaces into sipXivr, and ripping  
out the direct manipulation of mailboxprefs.xml by sipXconfig.

--Woof!
_______________________________________________
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/

Reply via email to