[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] 2269: AMI version 1.4 Specification Review Request

[Matt Jordan]

> On April 12, 2013, 8:33 p.m., David Lee wrote:
> > > The combination of DTMFBegin/DTMFEnd events replaces the deprecated DTMF event.
> > 
> > Deprecated means that it's there and we're not using it. Do you mean removed?

When I wrote that I meant deprecated.

Now that we've had time to think about it, I feel like it should be 'removed'. The switch over from Event: DTMF with a subtype to Event: DTMFBegin/DTMFEnd is relatively straight forward, and is being done primarily for consistency. I don't think we get a whole lot of benefit from sending two DTMF pairs of events.


- Matt


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2269/#review8259
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 8, 2013, 8:41 a.m., Matt Jordan wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2269/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 8, 2013, 8:41 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Repository: Asterisk
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> A proposed revamp of the AMI protocol has been written and is available for discussion:
> 
> https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/AMI+1.4+Specification
> 
> Please note that this will change the AMI protocol significantly, and represents a major shift in how the protocol represents operations in Asterisk to consumers of the protocol.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/2269/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Matt Jordan
> 
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20130412/f676b17e/attachment.htm>