<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 2:43 PM, George Joseph <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gjoseph@digium.com" target="_blank">gjoseph@digium.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>We just discovered that the <wbr>PJSIPShowRegistrationsInbound command really only dumps all aors regardless of whether there's an inbound registration associated with it or not. Fixing this would mean a change to what this command returns so I'm trying to get some feedback. There are 2 solution alternatives...</div><div><br></div><div>1. We could replace the current <wbr>InboundRegistrationDetail event (which isn't even registered) with a ContactStatusDetail event. Obviously this is a change for anyone who uses this command.</div><div><br></div><div>2. We could send a ContactStatusDetail event along with the existing InboundRegistrationDetail event. This would double the number of events sent and therefore increase the total data sent.</div><div><br></div><div>Honestly I'm not sure how this command was ever useful to anybody so I'm leaning towards option 1 but we need feedback.</div><div><br></div><div>This would be a change to 13, 14 and master.</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="m_2857272007992558528gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-size:12.8px">George Joseph</span><br style="font-size:12.8px"><span style="font-size:12.8px">Digium, Inc. | Software Developer</span><span style="font-size:12.8px"><br>445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - US<br></span><span style="font-size:12.8px">Check us out at: </span><a href="http://www.digium.com/" rel="noreferrer" style="color:rgb(17,85,204);font-size:12.8px" target="_blank">www.digium.com</a><span style="font-size:12.8px"> & </span><a href="http://www.asterisk.org/" rel="noreferrer" style="color:rgb(17,85,204);font-size:12.8px" target="_blank">www.<wbr>asterisk.org</a><br><div><br></div></div></div>
</font></span></div>
<br>--<br>
______________________________<wbr>______________________________<wbr>_________<br>
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by <a href="http://www.api-digital.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.api-digital.com</a> --<br>
<br>
asterisk-dev mailing list<br>
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:<br>
<a href="http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.digium.com/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">I'd go with Option 1 - although it feels wrong breaking something (regardless as to whether it was already broken) within a minor/patch release. </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">In theory people should be reading release notes but I fall foul of not reading release notes for breakages within a minor/patch update - because in theory it shouldn't break anything... But we all know this does indeed happen. I would argue the current behaviour is broken and so you are fixing the broken behaviour - if people are relying on the data in this command then they're relying on incorrect data anyway.</div></div>