[asterisk-dev] Introducing the new ConfBridge

[Tony Mountifield]

In article <1543817687.43282.1300220807329.JavaMail.root at zimbra>,
David Vossel <dvossel at digium.com> wrote:
> 
> I don't think the profile name should be required for dynamic profiles.  Like tony said, it might be useful to
> specify a profile name from confbridge.conf as a template for the dynamic profile, but I think the dynamic profile
> should remain nameless.
> 
> Also, I like the idea of this being a dialplan function more than an app.  The function seems more consistent with
> the way other things are done in Asterisk.

It also has the advantage that the assignments to the function could
then be done directly in the AGI rather than having to set temporary
channel variables in the AGI and then expand them in the dialplan.

I also agree that the dynamic profiles should be logically nameless
(although presumably they will have some kind of name in the channel
store). It's worth giving a little thought to the most elegant way
of being able to specify a template - load a static profile into the
dynamic one - and then override items within it. These are probably
best kept as two separate operations. How about distinguishing them
by number of arguments:

Set(CONFBRIDGE(<bridge|user>)=mytemplate)
Set(CONFBRIDGE(<bridge|user>,option)=myvalue)
Set(CONFBRIDGE(<bridge|user>,option2)=myvalue2)

That way, we don't need to have a reserved option name for loading a template.

I think the template loading should probably create a clean profile first,
rather than carrying previously-set options forward.

(I also prefer concise names over verbose ones, so long as clarity isn't
sacrificed, which is why I used CONFBRIDGE() instead of CONFBRIDGE_PROFILE(),
but that's a secondary point)

Thanks for giving this some thought!

Cheers
Tony
-- 
Tony Mountifield
Work: tony at softins.co.uk - http://www.softins.co.uk
Play: tony at mountifield.org - http://tony.mountifield.org