<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Christopher Howard napsal(a):
<blockquote cite="mid:C47B3986.6C29%25chris@asteriasgi.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
On 6/15/08 2:21 PM, "lenz" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lenz-ml@oinko.net"><lenz-ml@oinko.net></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I would simply leave TRANSFER as it is, and add a new TRANSFERATTENDED for
the new feature.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
I think it should stay TRANSFER for both cases because every queue_log
parsers could remain without touch. Who wants to know if it was blind
or attendand transfer? <br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:C47B3986.6C29%25chris@asteriasgi.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><!---->
This sounds like a good solution however I don't think that it is a "new
feature". A transfer is a transfer. We have a similar issue with the
res_feature transfers.
Chris
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.api-digital.com">http://www.api-digital.com</a>--
asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev">http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>