[asterisk-dev] Re: [svn-commits] kpfleming: trunk r50538 - /trunk/main/channel.c

[Kevin P. Fleming]

Jared Smith wrote:
> Wouldn't this be better served as an argument to the Answer()
> application?  We already have one argument for a delay *before*
> answering the channel, so why not have one for a delay *after*
> answering the channel.  Now the commit log says "when a channel gets
> automatically answered by an application", so does this take place
> only if you don't call the Answer() application and leave it up to
> another application to automagicially answer the channel?

See my other reply... I'm already changing it to be that way.

Note that the Answer() argument was also mis-documented; it was already
a post-answer delay, and I've updated all three branches to reflect that.