| 00:09.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev andrewyager (~andrewyag@8-104-141-114.static-dsl.realworld.net.au) |
| 00:16.59 | *** join/#asterisk-dev andrewyager (~andrewyag@114.141.97.1) |
| 01:19.30 | *** join/#asterisk-dev infobot (ibot@96-86-209-99-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net) |
| 01:19.30 | *** topic/#asterisk-dev is 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 |
| 03:45.00 | *** join/#asterisk-dev andrewya_ (~andrewyag@114.141.97.1) |
| 08:31.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev csavinovich (sid296765@gateway/web/irccloud.com/x-xcdsbpercdxkqofs) |
| 08:31.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev drc (~drc@stratum0/entity/drc) |
| 08:31.14 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o csavinovich] by weber.freenode.net |
| 08:57.43 | jkroon | when pushing fixes to gerrit, is it preferred to keep it one fix per commit, or OK to fix two things in a single commit? Specifically I'm looking to: |
| 08:57.53 | jkroon | 1. Add a locks show cli command. |
| 08:58.02 | file | if they're distinct fixes, they should be separate |
| 08:58.04 | jkroon | 2. Fix the module_unload memory corruption. |
| 08:58.21 | file | those should be separate |
| 08:58.22 | jkroon | 3. Fix the requesters counting in certain failure cases |
| 08:59.18 | jkroon | I'll file three separate commits then thanks. |
| 09:01.10 | jkroon | 4. ref counting on module use ... |
| 09:01.34 | jkroon | but that'll be another day. |
| 09:02.16 | jkroon | not seeing how to handle that use-case safely. |
| 09:16.34 | *** join/#asterisk-dev tsearle (tsearlenim@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-gxwfpehsjttvcmwi) |
| 09:16.34 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o tsearle] by ChanServ |
| 09:16.37 | *** join/#asterisk-dev DanJenkins[m] (dannimblea@gateway/shell/matrix.org/x-wdhabmpfwetfwfgv) |
| 09:16.37 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o DanJenkins[m]] by ChanServ |
| 09:52.24 | jkroon | file - ast_module_user_add(chan) - as I understand the header this may do what I want too? which is essentially if a channel takes a lock, call that, and this will release the ref when the channel hangs up? |
| 09:52.55 | file | nope. |
| 09:53.01 | file | it doesn't automatically release. |
| 10:00.43 | jkroon | and ast_datastore_info->destroy doesn't get passed the ast_channel* ... |
| 10:00.58 | file | datastores are generic |
| 10:03.18 | jkroon | ok, going for simple ± ref counting then. should be fine. |
| 10:03.31 | jkroon | really appreciate the pointers. |
| 10:17.14 | *** join/#asterisk-dev andrewyager (~andrewyag@114.141.97.1) |
| 12:17.46 | *** join/#asterisk-dev andrewya_ (~andrewyag@114.141.97.1) |
| 12:31.29 | *** join/#asterisk-dev InterLinked (~ambassado@cpe-24-209-155-151.wi.res.rr.com) |
| 14:34.48 | jkroon | file, I've got three hunks for additional error logging that I used to try and debug, which I think is useful, but don't really fit in with any of the other patches - basically the one ast_debug is escalated to ast_log(LOG_ERROR ... which it should have been - it's an error condition, and if the channel tries to unlock a lock it never owned (it would already log about a lock it doesn't *currently* own), and then one I'm debating as it's the usual |
| 14:34.49 | jkroon | (TRY)?LOCK failure case which I'm in two minds about. Not critical stuff, but in case of future error reports these may give hints as to where to look for the problem. |
| 16:07.50 | file | InterLinked: I'm going to review only a few of your changes at a time. |
| 16:08.27 | InterLinked | That sounds fine, am I submitting too many? |
| 16:08.50 | file | to be quite honest, yes, 2 people have to review changes before submitting and we also have to look at any ramifications of them |
| 16:09.24 | InterLinked | Understandable, I'm at the tail end of what I was planning to submit for the moment |
| 16:09.29 | file | you can put them up, but I'm just letting you know it'll likely be awhile before stuff is reviewed |
| 16:09.41 | file | since generally Sangoma people are who review them and we do have other stuff we do |
| 16:10.38 | InterLinked | Right, completely understand. This week was just a good time for me to try to get some of this done, and I know the feature freeze is in July. |
| 16:10.58 | file | features can still be accepted in release versions. |
| 16:11.15 | file | just may not make the first 19.0.0 release |
| 16:35.44 | InterLinked | But 19 is not LTS, right, and then 18 would be frozen at that point? Or 16/18 could keep going? |
| 17:00.10 | InterLinked | Also, https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Asterisk+Sounds+Submission+Process makes it sound like there can be multiple prompts set for a given locale (e.g. en-us), is this still accurate? It seems like Allison Smith is the only en-us as of now. |
| 18:07.03 | file | 16/18 keeps going. |
| 18:07.20 | file | full lifetime of versions is listed on https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Asterisk+Versions |
| 18:07.41 | file | there is only Allison for English officially |
| 18:09.34 | InterLinked | But feature freeze means no new features to 16/18 for a few months, right, while 19 is getting rolled out? |
| 18:10.08 | InterLinked | I know there's only Allison for English, but would it be permitted to add a second voice to the official sets? Or is that outdated info on the page about multiple voices per locale? |
| 18:10.10 | file | no, it means that at the point we make the first release candidate for 19, we will make release candidates for 16 and 18 as well to align them |
| 18:10.22 | file | changes will still go in, but they will not be released for a bit |
| 18:11.11 | file | the policy hasn't changed, and sounds haven't been touched in years |
| 18:12.16 | InterLinked | Okay, because we have a repository of Pat Fleet Asterisk sounds which (IMO) sounds way better than the Allison Smith one. A few dozen prompts are missing so we're getting those recorded by her seen, and it seemed like we might as well get it all in order to add to that, if we can get the paperwork all set. |
| 18:13.49 | file | ok |
| 18:14.36 | electronic_eel | any plans to move this channel and #asterisk to another irc network soon? this https://www.devever.net/~hl/freenode_abuse doesn't look good to me |
| 18:14.49 | file | electronic_eel: nothing as of yet |
| 18:15.31 | electronic_eel | are you aware of the issues in the link i posted? |
| 18:15.36 | electronic_eel | you may want to reconsider |
| 18:15.48 | file | sighs |
| 18:16.26 | file | I am aware of such things, but I literally do not have access to the channels yet on Libera |
| 18:17.01 | file | so - is it likely we'll move? probably |
| 18:17.07 | file | is everything in place where I'm comfortable doing so? no |
| 18:17.07 | electronic_eel | ah, ok, so you wait till proper channel registration at libera is through |
| 18:17.18 | InterLinked | What about running a private IRC server? |
| 18:18.06 | file | gonna go with a no on that one |
| 18:18.42 | electronic_eel | i guess it is a lot of work and makes it harder for many people to use. so i don't see a real benefit in it |
| 18:19.47 | electronic_eel | for example you won't have stuff like a matrix bridge on your own server until you negotiate with matrix.org first |
| 18:20.35 | InterLinked | Yeah, I guess was thinking from a controlling the channel perspective, but that makes sense. My IRC program only shows these by default: Available networks are [dalnet, efnet, freenode, hispano, ircnet, moznet, oftc, quakenet, rizon, slashnet, snoonet, undernet] |
| 18:21.47 | file | to put things into context on how behind Libera is on this - the Python project only got access to theirs yesterday |
| 18:23.16 | electronic_eel | yeah, they have a lot of work to do. also there are sometimes still some stability issues. but it is improving quickly |
| 18:23.25 | file | yup |
| 18:23.48 | file | but until all the ducks are in a row, not a good idea to move - can't even touch the #asterisk topic there if we make a release |
| 18:25.18 | electronic_eel | ok. but this sounds much different than your first answer to my question above. |
| 18:25.34 | file | how so? |
| 18:25.56 | file | I said nothing as of yet, because I didn't want to say yes until everything was completely sorted |
| 18:26.37 | file | and made sure everything was okay with it (which I expect everyone will be) |
| 18:26.45 | file | er everyone |
| 18:27.17 | electronic_eel | i would have answered something along the lines of waiting for libera to stabilize |
| 18:27.47 | file | ok |
| 18:29.51 | file | "waiting for Libera to stabilize and for access to the Asterisk namespace there, so it can then be proposed to everyone to make sure we're all on the same page and if so, then jumping there" |
| 18:30.41 | electronic_eel | :-) |
| 18:31.08 | file | sorry, this keeps coming up and I've repeated the same things over and over |
| 18:31.11 | file | it's getting tiring :P |
| 18:31.36 | file | stashes that sentence away |
| 20:50.48 | *** join/#asterisk-dev gtjoseph_ (~gtjoseph@asterisk/developer/gtjoseph) |
| 20:50.48 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o gtjoseph_] by ChanServ |
| 22:02.04 | *** join/#asterisk-dev gtjoseph_ (~gtjoseph@asterisk/developer/gtjoseph) |
| 22:02.04 | *** mode/#asterisk-dev [+o gtjoseph_] by ChanServ |