[asterisk-dev] Manger inconsistency: ASTERISK-17455

[Matthew Jordan]

Is it possible to do the following:

1. In the first targeted release, when an Unlink event occurs, also raise the manager_bridge_event.  Document that the Unlink event is deprecated and that subscribers should be triggering off the Bridge event.

2. In the second targeted release, remove the offending Unlink events.

I'm not sure of the implication of having two events fired for the same action that occurred - that may be worse then simply changing the API.  But at least it would give people who are only looking for the Unlink event a chance to switch over between versions.

Matt

----- Original Message -----
From: "Terry Wilson" <twilson at digium.com>
To: "Asterisk Developers Mailing List" <asterisk-dev at lists.digium.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2011 5:42:18 PM
Subject: [asterisk-dev] Manger inconsistency: ASTERISK-17455

Issue: https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-17455

Back in 2007 there was an attempt to make AMI more consistent. One of the changes involved changing Link/Unlink manager events to Bridge events with a Bridgestate: Link/Unlink header. One Link and one Unlink event in channel.c were converted. Unfortunately, there were two more Unlink events that were not converted. So, things have been really inconsistent in this case for 4 years now.

It's easy enough to change, but I thought I'd get people's opinions on where the change should go. I don't like making API behavior changes to released branches, so my vote is for 1.10+ being fixed and leaving 1.8 with an inconsistent API in case people have come to rely upon it. With that said, if people are using these events and they are inconsistent, it is possible that they are missing events because they are just looking for the documented behavior. There is also always the option of making a config option that is disabled by default that would present the more consistent behavior. Since it has been 4 years since the change was made and we are just now hearing about the issue, I am leaning towards not going to the trouble/complexity of adding another config option and just making the change 1.10+.

Opinions?