| 00:17.56 | *** join/#asterisk-dev infobot (ibot@c-174-52-60-165.hsd1.ut.comcast.net) |
| 00:17.56 | *** topic/#asterisk-dev is Take the March 2019 Asterisk User Survey! https://goo.gl/forms/xL1VUHRsf95saly13 -- Asterisk Development Discussion -=- http://www.asterisk.org/developers -=- Tier 2 and 3.14159265 support is in #asterisk -=- Check out our blog! blogs.asterisk.org -=- Follow on Twitter at @AsteriskDev |
| 01:33.07 | *** join/#asterisk-dev spatel (~spatel@pool-98-118-124-216.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) |
| 05:46.07 | *** join/#asterisk-dev sduthil (~sduthil@modemcable094.94-70-69.static.videotron.ca) |
| 06:56.39 | *** join/#asterisk-dev CELYA_ (~Thunderbi@92.184.100.129) |
| 07:09.38 | *** join/#asterisk-dev CELYA_1 (~Thunderbi@80.12.63.7) |
| 07:10.23 | *** join/#asterisk-dev pchero_work (~pchero@87.213.247.82) |
| 08:54.47 | *** join/#asterisk-dev CELYA_ (~Thunderbi@80.12.63.7) |
| 09:52.25 | *** join/#asterisk-dev CELYA_ (~Thunderbi@80.12.63.7) |
| 11:28.31 | *** join/#asterisk-dev CELYA_ (~Thunderbi@92.184.112.108) |
| 13:43.36 | seanbright | for new features, my impression is that we are trying to avoid "magic channel variables" for changing behavior, is that a safe assumption? |
| 13:43.52 | seanbright | re: https://gerrit.asterisk.org/c/asterisk/+/11651 |
| 13:49.45 | file | I'm personally not a huge fan of such things, I don't recall if there's a blanket statement as such |
| 13:55.17 | *** join/#asterisk-dev bford (uid283514@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-wvbcveanzmcvmhjr) |
| 13:55.17 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o bford] by ChanServ |
| 13:57.36 | seanbright | well... we could make it a blanket statement right now... we have the power |
| 13:57.42 | seanbright | and wiki editing permissions |
| 13:59.31 | *** join/#asterisk-dev spatel (~spatel@static-71-174-102-211.bstnma.fios.verizon.net) |
| 14:06.37 | *** join/#asterisk-dev kharwell (uid358942@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-yqiqmjuowslfgncm) |
| 14:06.37 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o kharwell] by ChanServ |
| 16:17.04 | seanbright | danjenkins: so that i am clear on the XAGI situation, you said that you originally got the code from a third-party source? |
| 16:17.59 | danjenkins | yes but I cant track down past @tzafrir who made it originally - @file got there before me in asking tzafrir in the issue about licensing of code |
| 16:18.09 | seanbright | ah |
| 16:18.29 | seanbright | you should put the issue ID in the commit message |
| 16:18.56 | danjenkins | oh sorry, I thought it all just auto linked up because of the branch being the issue ID |
| 16:19.09 | seanbright | don't be sorry |
| 16:19.12 | seanbright | JUST FIX IT |
| 16:19.12 | seanbright | heh |
| 16:19.16 | danjenkins | :D |
| 16:19.43 | danjenkins | i tried to follow the gerrit instructions on the wiki |
| 16:19.44 | danjenkins | which still seem wrong |
| 16:20.00 | file | Commit message is a separate page |
| 16:20.33 | tzafrir | danjenkins: what is it? |
| 16:20.47 | seanbright | tzafrir: https://repo.or.cz/asterisk-bristuff.git/commit/0e998fdff62b4a399a514d948c00698caaf53807 |
| 16:20.57 | danjenkins | thanks @seanbright |
| 16:20.58 | seanbright | who wrote it/what's the license |
| 16:20.58 | coreyfarrell | I agree with seanbright about magic channel variables being bad. I'm +1 on making it a blanket statement against (exceptions only if no other option is available?) |
| 16:21.03 | tzafrir | Bristuff. Cool. |
| 16:21.31 | seanbright | Klaus-Peter Junghanns <kpj@junghanns.net> |
| 16:21.35 | seanbright | that's in the test file |
| 16:22.03 | seanbright | he's one of the RTP bleed guys |
| 16:22.04 | seanbright | fancy |
| 16:22.45 | tzafrir | I didn't write it myself. It was part of the huge bristuff patch. IIRC it was paravoid who broke it to several smaller patches. |
| 16:22.57 | tzafrir | But it may have been me. |
| 16:23.44 | danjenkins | so can we just say @tzafrir was the original author? reach out to Klaus? |
| 16:23.59 | tzafrir | Yes. |
| 16:24.04 | seanbright | hmm |
| 16:24.26 | seanbright | i'm going to bring in our legal analyst, dr. oz |
| 16:24.32 | seanbright | dr. oz... what's going on here? |
| 16:24.33 | danjenkins | as far as im concerned @tzafrir is the original author |
| 16:24.40 | seanbright | well that's nice |
| 16:24.44 | danjenkins | hahaha |
| 16:24.45 | danjenkins | i know |
| 16:24.47 | danjenkins | right |
| 16:25.44 | danjenkins | the commit was 10 years ago |
| 16:26.27 | seanbright | assuming that klaus was the original author, we'd need him to sign the CLA |
| 16:26.27 | tsearle | there should be a statuate of limitations on copyrights |
| 16:26.45 | seanbright | (i may be talking out of school, but that is at least my understanding) |
| 16:26.59 | danjenkins | no i completely agree @seanbright - im just being flippant |
| 16:27.04 | seanbright | nice. i painted the mona lisa. |
| 16:27.11 | seanbright | shit is 500 years old |
| 16:27.35 | seanbright | and this patch ain't no mona lisa :P |
| 16:27.44 | danjenkins | so yeah from the readme of that repo - "The branch bristuff includes the Asterisk parts of the BRIstuff patch by K. P. Junghanns." |
| 16:27.59 | seanbright | ok, let us know what he says. |
| 16:28.03 | danjenkins | so I'll try and reach out to Klaus |
| 16:28.09 | tsearle | and you don't se Da Vinci laweryering up do you? |
| 16:28.59 | danjenkins | thanks @tzafrir @seanbright @file |
| 16:29.19 | seanbright | ð |
| 16:29.34 | seanbright | (i hope that's a thumbs up emoji... can't really see it from my end) |
| 16:29.44 | danjenkins | it is! |
| 16:29.45 | danjenkins | magic |
| 16:29.50 | seanbright | nice |
| 16:30.14 | seanbright | the new windows 10 update has a key shortcut for the emoji list |
| 16:30.27 | seanbright | before this, my computer was unusable |
| 16:30.37 | danjenkins | 10x ninja engineer |
| 16:31.08 | seanbright | file: are WIP reviews visible to people that aren't the author? |
| 16:31.24 | file | um |
| 16:31.36 | file | I don't... know |
| 16:31.45 | seanbright | did you see my moh/vector patch before an hour ago? |
| 16:32.01 | file | admins can see more |
| 16:32.06 | seanbright | ah |
| 16:32.19 | seanbright | danjenkins: can you mark the review WIP |
| 16:32.26 | danjenkins | how do i do that? |
| 16:32.26 | seanbright | until the licensing concerns are worked out |
| 16:32.35 | seanbright | are you using the new UI or old UI? |
| 16:32.44 | danjenkins | it looks new? |
| 16:32.46 | seanbright | should say at the bottom |
| 16:32.49 | seanbright | "Switch to..." |
| 16:32.54 | danjenkins | ah im new |
| 16:33.04 | seanbright | click on the review |
| 16:33.14 | seanbright | far right 3 vertical dots |
| 16:33.19 | seanbright | mark WIP |
| 16:33.34 | seanbright | thanks |
| 16:33.44 | danjenkins | done |
| 16:33.44 | seanbright | also: i see it, so. question answered. |
| 16:33.48 | coreyfarrell | I thought I saw the WIP review posted to the mailing list. |
| 17:10.21 | danjenkins | @seanbright im confused by the emails im getting.... i see you updated the commit message for me but it says you uploaded a patch? |
| 17:10.46 | danjenkins | thanks by the way! |
| 17:10.47 | seanbright | yes, the parent commit of your review was not on the 16 branch |
| 17:11.01 | seanbright | which is why the verification build was bombing |
| 17:11.14 | danjenkins | ooohhhhhhh |
| 17:11.17 | danjenkins | makes sense |
| 17:11.28 | seanbright | parent commit was "Update for 16.5.0-rc1" |
| 17:11.37 | seanbright | i guess that's on the release branch |
| 17:11.44 | danjenkins | sorry! im terrible at this apparentlky |
| 17:11.57 | seanbright | eh, could have been worse |
| 17:12.43 | danjenkins | ð |
| 17:30.33 | opticron | wonders how many others that emoji works for |
| 17:33.10 | seanbright | i just see a little squiggle |
| 17:33.35 | opticron | getting emoji functional in irssi inside screen via ssh was certainly an adventure |
| 17:33.43 | opticron | seanbright, it's a yellow thumbs up |
| 17:33.56 | seanbright | actually, i think it's the thumbs up but it's cropped to the width of a single monospace char |
| 17:34.03 | seanbright | opticron: yeah i know, i sent one earlier |
| 17:34.09 | opticron | ah |
| 17:34.13 | opticron | so you did |
| 17:34.45 | seanbright | https://pasteboard.co/IqyutJ3.png |
| 17:36.15 | opticron | yep, just the left side of it |
| 17:37.49 | seanbright | complete unusable |
| 17:40.48 | seanbright | i'm going to be screwed when i need another fd to read/write to from AGI |
| 17:40.54 | seanbright | maybe we'll add an XXAGI |
| 17:41.07 | seanbright | you see where this is going |
| 17:54.19 | opticron | we do |
| 18:15.30 | file | seanbright: MOH fighting back? |
| 18:45.41 | seanbright | no |
| 18:46.06 | seanbright | i have a series of patches and piece mealing them into gerrit is going to take forever to get reviewed |
| 18:46.25 | seanbright | there aren't alot of people actively reviewing patches |
| 18:46.30 | seanbright | (we're all busy) |
| 18:46.40 | seanbright | so i'm going to just throw them all up there at one time |
| 18:46.52 | file | ah |
| 20:34.09 | seanbright | so we're all keeping our distance from the AudioSocket review, eh? |
| 20:42.00 | kharwell | there is some still discussion about what approach to use and who is implementing what and how, so figured I'd hold off until what we know is going to be accepted |
| 20:42.36 | kharwell | for instance, gtjoseph correct me if I am wrong, but gtjoseph is working on a solution that might override what's currently up |
| 20:43.06 | gtjoseph | i will not correct you |
| 20:43.25 | seanbright | i would certainly prefer to use a standardized/RFCd protocol than a custom built one |
| 20:43.26 | kharwell | seanbright: sounds like I told ya right...hopefully |
| 20:43.30 | seanbright | heh |
| 20:44.32 | kharwell | I had similar concerns actually |
| 20:45.05 | gtjoseph | backs away quickly |
| 20:45.15 | kharwell | :-D |
| 20:45.46 | seanbright | for me, if i have followed the thread closely enough, it seems like the reasoning is "it's too hard to use chan_rtp" |
| 20:46.03 | seanbright | which is not a good reason to introduce YACP (yet-another-custom-protocol) |
| 20:49.16 | seanbright | goes back to re-read the thread |
| 20:50.59 | seanbright | "RTP is a good option except for the difficulty for non-telephony people to interact with it." |
| 20:53.26 | kharwell | I dunno. I get a lighter approach than just using what we already have with SIP and SDP, but RTP seems like a minimum standard to keep |
| 20:54.25 | gtjoseph | RTP will be _one_ of the eventually supported payload encapsulations. |
| 20:54.44 | seanbright | "supported payload encapsulations"... oh shit |
| 20:54.50 | danjenkins | @seanbright thank you so much for having a look over that PR |
| 20:55.01 | seanbright | someone is over-engineering the shit out of this one |
| 20:55.02 | seanbright | heh |
| 20:55.04 | seanbright | danjenkins: sure |
| 20:56.29 | seanbright | i guess my point is... p2p audio streaming is a solved problem, is it not? |
| 20:56.42 | kharwell | seanbright: maybe we can wrap in a new AGI protocol :-P |
| 20:56.51 | seanbright | just what we need |
| 20:57.02 | seanbright | audio streaming over AMI |
| 20:57.42 | gtjoseph | how about audio streaming via log messages? |
| 20:58.02 | seanbright | gtjoseph: so is this design going to be vetted outside of sangoma before it's implemented/ |
| 20:58.16 | seanbright | for feedback, etc. |
| 20:58.17 | gtjoseph | yep, email to list tomorrow |
| 20:58.23 | seanbright | alrighty |
| 21:00.15 | seanbright | going to have to find some time to go through commit history to figure out why the agi_enhanced header is in decimal format |
| 21:04.08 | seanbright | well the intent was major.minor version |
| 21:04.19 | seanbright | and now we all know |
| 21:04.38 | seanbright | EAGI is 16 years old |
| 21:04.49 | seanbright | mazel tov |
