On 17/09/14 15:38, Federico Cabiddu wrote:
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On 17/09/14 13:01, Olle E. Johansson wrote:
On 17 Sep 2014, at 12:54, Daniel-Constantin Mierla
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hello,
historically 'tm' stays for 'transaction management' --
the the x for the other module was for eXtensions.
The new module doesn't really do any management of
transaction, but store structures that include the id of
transactions with custom info (at this moment an AoR). It
has a completely different hash table in memory (so
nothing new in tm structure). Internally it binds to tm to
get some callbacks executed, but also to registrar module
for getting access to new branches.
Being in relation only with Transaction, storing some
extra info for it, not sure the 'm' makes sense to add.
The whole idea seems to be to manipulate a transaction - add a
branch to an existing transaction, so the "m" certainly makes
sense to me... ;-)
Well, somehow around that but not exactly :-) -- because the
function doing that is in tm, added by commit:
468a2c645f5fcb66376b81b06e69eb8f5377bb02
The tsilo module just calls it internally via tm api. The module
is managing an internal hash table, acting on some callbacks from
tm and calling functions from registrar and tm. There are many
other modules calling functions from tm (e.g., dialog, msilo, ...).
But maybe the functions of the module should be renamed to use the
prefix ts_ instead of t_.
I'm fine with this change if you feel that it would be better. Just
let me know if I have to proceed with the change.
I think it would be more clear with a prefix like ts_, you can go ahead
and do the changes.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda
_______________________________________________
sr-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
