On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 11:15 AM, Paul Belanger <paul.belanger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Scott Griepentrog > <sgriepentrog@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> While working on https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-22697 which adds the ability to raise an arbitrary user defined event message from ARI, I have run into a question of backwards compatibility on the naming of the event. >> >> The existing Dialplan Userevent() application is always associated with the channel the dialplan is executing on - thus it signals to AMI Event: ChannelUserevent and provides details on the channel, along with the arbitrary event name specified, and any additional name/value arguments. It also signals the same ChannelUserevent to ARI with the same information. >> >> When raising a user event through ARI, the URL /applications/{applicationName}/user/{eventName} will be used, and additional name/value arguments can be specified, along with any number of channel, bridge, or endpoints identifiers. This will be signalled to the stasis app, which will be received by that app and any others subscribed to it. If at least one channel is given, the AMI Event ChannelUserevent will also be signalled, so as to be compatible with the existing AMI event. >> >> The question I have then is this: Because the User event is being expanded in ARI to allow for signalling without an associated channel, it's no longer appropriate to call it "ChannelUserevent". I think it should be renamed "UserEvent", although only within ARI (AMI still uses ChannelUserevent, and wont be raised without a channel). A dialplan UserEvent() will still raise AMI ChannelUserevent and also ARI Userevent both with a single channel. >> >> Any thoughts on this? >> >> Is there anyone using ChannelUserevent in ARI that would be affected by this? >> >> Is it a potential source of confusion to have two different names in two API's for the same event? >> > Don't see an issue renaming it, but how about just user (or custom). > Calling an event UserEvent seems redundant to me. It's a backwards incompatible change. I'd prefer if we don't rename it. -- Matthew Jordan Digium, Inc. | Engineering Manager 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org _______________________________________________ asterisk-app-dev mailing list asterisk-app-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.digium.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-app-dev
