[asterisk-bugs] [Asterisk 0016319]: When using 'joinempty=strict', "in use" devices not seen as "unavailable".

[Asterisk Bug Tracker]

A NOTE has been added to this issue. 
====================================================================== 
https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=16319 
====================================================================== 
Reported By:                jiddings
Assigned To:                
====================================================================== 
Project:                    Asterisk
Issue ID:                   16319
Category:                   Applications/app_queue
Reproducibility:            always
Severity:                   tweak
Priority:                   normal
Status:                     new
Asterisk Version:           1.4.27 
JIRA:                        
Regression:                 No 
Reviewboard Link:            
SVN Branch (only for SVN checkouts, not tarball releases): N/A 
SVN Revision (number only!):  
Request Review:              
====================================================================== 
Date Submitted:             2009-11-24 17:19 CST
Last Modified:              2009-11-25 06:18 CST
====================================================================== 
Summary:                    When using 'joinempty=strict', "in use" devices not
seen as "unavailable".
Description: 
This may not be a bug, but rather just a misunderstanding of the concept of
what 'unavailable' means, however..

When an agent was on another call (in use) but using joinempty=strict, the
caller was able to join the queue. My layman interpretation of unavailable
would be unable to accept a call, regardless of their status -- invalid,
unavailable, paused, or in use. 
====================================================================== 

---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
 (0114271) davidw (reporter) - 2009-11-25 06:18
 https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=16319#c114271 
---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Please resubmit the patch as a licensed attachment, as Digium cannot look
at code that is not submitted in that way and I don't want to start looking
at code that Digium cannot look at.

As a general note, the intended behaviour of, in particular, leave empty,
is not useful in difficult cases and there is a new, more general, way of
specifying the conditions in something like 1.6.2 (may be later). 

Issue History 
Date Modified    Username       Field                    Change               
====================================================================== 
2009-11-25 06:18 davidw         Note Added: 0114271                          
======================================================================