Keith wrote: ... > It seems to me that this is a fundamental problem with the way that > groups are implemented in SipX. Here are two possible alternatives > that I would suggest: > > 1. Provide a boolean for each setting that defines if the value in > the setting should take affect or not (don't calculate it based on the > SIpX default), or
+1 The problem I see is that a setting does not participate in determining the final value unless it is "explicitly set", but there is no way to "explicitly set" a setting to the default value. There was a lengthy discussion on this almost two years ago. Damian pointed out that we could achieve what you suggest above with a UI change, and the current data model can already handle that. The thread it long, but this message is approximately where we all started getting on the same page http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-dev/msg07192.html. -Paul [email protected] _______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list [email protected] List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users Unsubscribe: http://list.sipfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/sipx-users
