[asterisk-dev] BRIDGEPEER on multi-party conferences: Thoughts?

[Matthew Jordan]

On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Corey Farrell <git at cfware.com> wrote:
> It might be a problem if BRIDGEPEER is being compared to an empty string to
> see if a channel is alone.
>
> What if you made BRIDGEPEER into a built-in channel variable (like
> ${EPOCH}).  This would mean that you wouldn't be setting any channels, you'd
> only do a lookup when requested.  One side-effect is that VarSet events
> would never be produced for this variable, not sure how much this would
> matter given better events to monitor ConfBridge joins/parts?
>

I think fixing this is going to be a breaking change no matter what we
do. Having a 'pull' mechanism that still results in the same output is
nice, in that if someone *were* relying on getting some form of list
of the participants, they can still do so.

I will say that removing the VarSet for BRIDGEPEER would break a fair
number of testsuite tests, although that shouldn't be a reason not to
do the change. It is evidence, however, that we ourselves relied on
the setting of BRIDGEPEER to get an indication of who the channel was
in a bridge with.

-- 
Matthew Jordan
Digium, Inc. | CTO
445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org