[asterisk-dev] users and peers (and phones and trunks) ?

[Johansson Olle E]

26 okt 2006 kl. 18.04 skrev Luigi Rizzo:

> On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 05:31:15PM +0200, Johansson Olle E wrote:
>> We just had that debate a while ago on asterisk-users. Google and you
>> will
>> find the recap.
>>
>> Basically: From chan_sips perspective: There's no reason at all
>> and it's going away. As you are aware of, I have code in a branch
>> that removes the user, which now is integrated into codename
>> pineapple.
>
> i am asking because you still seem to keep two different "types"
> in your branch (there are small differenced in handling them),
> and i don't understand why.
If you read the comments, the "user" object will be gone
soon in the pineapple branch.

For Asterisk chan_sip backwards compatibility is important
always, that's why I still keep the user while in a coming
version I would remove it. Since that code is moving
towards pineapple, I don't see it being included in
chan_sip - it was experimental because I wanted to
see what happened. I included it in test-this-branch
and no one reported any issues with it.

If you give me some time, pineapple will become the
future platform and chan_sip will be freezed to current
featureset and configuration.

>
> second - if "user" is useless, could'nt we just tell people
> "please change "type=user" or "type=friend" to "type=peer"
> in your config and everything will go fine ?
> (or not even tell them and just remap that underneath while
> reading the conf file) ?

Mark has refused changing the matching on peers
to what I do in the pineapple branch. It was a clear and definitive
"no" to a two-line patch.

That's one reason on why we have to keep peers and users in
chan_sip and fork to create new concepts and
be totally free from the demand on backwards compatibility.

Mark and Kevin has on the other hand given me the go-ahead to do that
and in the new channel have the freedom to
*not* be backwards compatible.

I won't spend time on backporting and fixing the
architecture in the old code, since we've concluded
that the code needs a major rework and we
need to fork away to be able to fix a lot of the issues
there are in the old stuff.

Did you read the mails on the -users list, really?
If not, i recommend that reading.

Luigi, let me continue hacking up chan_sip in codename
pineapple for a while, then you're very welcome to
assist me when we start the process of changing the
functionality to what we really want, based on the
experience of the current code.

Have patience!

/O