<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body>
<div>I wholeheartedly agree with Dan and Paul here. Asterisk 12 should be considered a development release that can change within minor versions in order to be as feature and API complete as possible for the next LTS.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If this isn't the intention of the standard releases then my understanding of the discussions around them at AstriDevCon was mistaken. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Sent from mobile device. Please excuse any brevity or made up words. <br>
<br>
-------- Original message --------<br>
From: Dan Jenkins <br>
Date:04/19/2014 7:29 AM (GMT-05:00) <br>
To: Asterisk Application Development discussion <br>
Subject: Re: [asterisk-app-dev] Rename ChannelUserevent to Userevent in ARI? <br>
<br>
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Matthew Jordan <span dir="ltr">
<<a href="mailto:mjordan@digium.com" target="_blank">mjordan@digium.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<div class="">On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Paul Belanger<br>
<<a href="mailto:paul.belanger@polybeacon.com">paul.belanger@polybeacon.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Scott Griepentrog<br>
> <<a href="mailto:sgriepentrog@digium.com">sgriepentrog@digium.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> While working on <a href="https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-22697" target="_blank">
https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-22697</a> which adds the ability to raise an arbitrary user defined event message from ARI, I have run into a question of backwards compatibility on the naming of the event.<br>
>><br>
>> The existing Dialplan Userevent() application is always associated with the channel the dialplan is executing on - thus it signals to AMI Event: ChannelUserevent and provides details on the channel, along with the arbitrary event name specified, and any
additional name/value arguments. It also signals the same ChannelUserevent to ARI with the same information.<br>
>><br>
>> When raising a user event through ARI, the URL /applications/{applicationName}/user/{eventName} will be used, and additional name/value arguments can be specified, along with any number of channel, bridge, or endpoints identifiers. This will be signalled
to the stasis app, which will be received by that app and any others subscribed to it. If at least one channel is given, the AMI Event ChannelUserevent will also be signalled, so as to be compatible with the existing AMI event.<br>
>><br>
>> The question I have then is this: Because the User event is being expanded in ARI to allow for signalling without an associated channel, it's no longer appropriate to call it "ChannelUserevent". I think it should be renamed "UserEvent", although only within
ARI (AMI still uses ChannelUserevent, and wont be raised without a channel). A dialplan UserEvent() will still raise AMI ChannelUserevent and also ARI Userevent both with a single channel.<br>
>><br>
>> Any thoughts on this?<br>
>><br>
>> Is there anyone using ChannelUserevent in ARI that would be affected by this?<br>
>><br>
>> Is it a potential source of confusion to have two different names in two API's for the same event?<br>
>><br>
> Don't see an issue renaming it, but how about just user (or custom).<br>
> Calling an event UserEvent seems redundant to me.<br>
<br>
</div>
It's a backwards incompatible change. I'd prefer if we don't rename it.<br>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Matt, which are you saying no to? The whole thing or Paul's suggestion? I do agree with Paul - it's a custom event but I can see why you wouldn't want to go that far. However I can agree with the rename of ChannelUserevent to Userevent (I don't like how
it's Userevent - it should be UserEvent....but null point) - if you're saying this is a backwards incompatible change - it is. However, 12 isn't an LTS and there were discussions about how 12 would be an iterative process due to how many changes were included
in it - this meant there could be these types of changes included in the process. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>The ARI hasn't been in previous versions of Asterisk, and so you'd just be incompatible with previous versions of 12, of which there aren't that many - and people should know that if you're using 12, expect changes and updates.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't see an issue with this rename. I'd like to see it go further, I agree with Paul - call it what it is, it's a custom event. I'd like to be able to go even further and just name the event myself but that's not going to happen ;)</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Dan</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Matthew Jordan<br>
Digium, Inc. | Engineering Manager<br>
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA<br>
Check us out at: <a href="http://digium.com" target="_blank">http://digium.com</a> &
<a href="http://asterisk.org" target="_blank">http://asterisk.org</a><br>
</font></span>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
asterisk-app-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:asterisk-app-dev@lists.digium.com">asterisk-app-dev@lists.digium.com</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.digium.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-app-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.digium.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-app-dev</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>