Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 11:06:19AM -0600, Russell Bryant wrote: >> Eliel Sardanons wrote: >>> We could start a janitor for creating a 'foo reload' and we could make >>> de 'module reload *.so' do a module unload; module load >> I would rather not change the behavior of "module reload". I think that >> would >> be much worse than just removing it, as it changes behavior that has existed >> for >> years. Running "module unload / module load" isn't that bad. > > What's so bad about having some syntactic sugar? And actually having > some stable CLI between two releases? > I don't think I understand what you're trying to imply here. Which part are you agreeing or disagreeing with? -- Russell Bryant Senior Software Engineer Open Source Team Lead Digium, Inc. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
Tilghman Lesher wrote: > On Tuesday 27 November 2007 11:26:34 Eliel Sardanons wrote: >> - Remove the 'reload()' handler function on every module. > > I wouldn't do this last one. That is the handler that is called when we do > a generic 'reload', for every single module. Ah, good catch. Agreed ... -- Russell Bryant Senior Software Engineer Open Source Team Lead Digium, Inc. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
Tilghman Lesher wrote: > On Tuesday 27 November 2007 11:26:34 Eliel Sardanons wrote: > >> On 11/27/07, Russell Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Eliel Sardanons wrote: >>> We could start a janitor for creating a 'foo reload' and we could make de 'module reload *.so' do a module unload; module load >>> I would rather not change the behavior of "module reload". I think that >>> would be much worse than just removing it, as it changes behavior that >>> has existed for years. Running "module unload / module load" isn't that >>> bad. >>> >> So: >> - Start a janitor to implement 'foo reload' for every module that does >> something in the reload() handler function. >> - Deprecate CLI command 'module reload ' >> - Remove the 'reload()' handler function on every module. >> > > I wouldn't do this last one. That is the handler that is called when we do > a generic 'reload', for every single module. > > I agree with Tilghman. -- Bird's The Word Technologies, Inc. http://www.btwtech.com/ ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 11:06:19AM -0600, Russell Bryant wrote: > Eliel Sardanons wrote: > > We could start a janitor for creating a 'foo reload' and we could make > > de 'module reload *.so' do a module unload; module load > > I would rather not change the behavior of "module reload". I think that would > be much worse than just removing it, as it changes behavior that has existed > for > years. Running "module unload / module load" isn't that bad. What's so bad about having some syntactic sugar? And actually having some stable CLI between two releases? -- Tzafrir Cohen icq#16849755 jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +972-50-7952406 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xorcom.com iax:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/tzafrir ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
On Tuesday 27 November 2007 11:26:34 Eliel Sardanons wrote: > On 11/27/07, Russell Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Eliel Sardanons wrote: > > > We could start a janitor for creating a 'foo reload' and we could make > > > de 'module reload *.so' do a module unload; module load > > > > I would rather not change the behavior of "module reload". I think that > > would be much worse than just removing it, as it changes behavior that > > has existed for years. Running "module unload / module load" isn't that > > bad. > > So: > - Start a janitor to implement 'foo reload' for every module that does > something in the reload() handler function. > - Deprecate CLI command 'module reload ' > - Remove the 'reload()' handler function on every module. I wouldn't do this last one. That is the handler that is called when we do a generic 'reload', for every single module. -- Tilghman ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
So: - Start a janitor to implement 'foo reload' for every module that does something in the reload() handler function. - Deprecate CLI command 'module reload ' - Remove the 'reload()' handler function on every module. Eliel On 11/27/07, Russell Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Eliel Sardanons wrote: > > We could start a janitor for creating a 'foo reload' and we could make > > de 'module reload *.so' do a module unload; module load > > I would rather not change the behavior of "module reload". I think that would > be much worse than just removing it, as it changes behavior that has existed > for > years. Running "module unload / module load" isn't that bad. > > -- > Russell Bryant > Senior Software Engineer > Open Source Team Lead > Digium, Inc. > > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- > > asterisk-dev mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev > -- Eliel Sardañons ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
Eliel Sardanons wrote: > We could start a janitor for creating a 'foo reload' and we could make > de 'module reload *.so' do a module unload; module load I would rather not change the behavior of "module reload". I think that would be much worse than just removing it, as it changes behavior that has existed for years. Running "module unload / module load" isn't that bad. -- Russell Bryant Senior Software Engineer Open Source Team Lead Digium, Inc. ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
Re: [asterisk-dev] Deprecate every '* reload' CLI command?
I agree with the idea of starting a new Janitor to update the modules to use ' reload' and change the behaviour of module reload to unload and load the module. This way, ' reload' should reparse the configuration file and 'module reload' should unload and load the module. Also, I think this should be documented in some doc for the sake of consistency to users and developers in future releases. Best regards, Tomás. On Nov 27, 2007 1:39 PM, Eliel Sardanons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We could start a janitor for creating a 'foo reload' and we could make > de 'module reload *.so' do a module unload; module load > > > On 11/27/07, Russell Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Kevin P. Fleming wrote: > > > I would be surprised if any module's 'reload' command actually did > much > > > of anything different than 'module reload' for the same module does, > but > > > as BJ points out there certainly is no reason that they have to > provide > > > the same functionality. > > > > They better not do anything different. :) If they do, I would > definitely > > consider it a bug. That would be frustratingly inconsistent. > > > > > I think adding a 'voicemail reload' command is a fine idea. > > > > Well, I guess I agree that it is fine because it is a bit more user > friendly > > than "module reload app_voicemail.so". However, I don't think we can > leave the > > conversation at that. > > > > The Asterisk CLI syntax got significantly switched around for Asterisk > 1.4 for > > the sake of consistency. This issue points to another area where the > Asterisk > > CLI is not consistent. We need to pick one way or the other and stick > with it. > > If people really like the idea of having individual reload CLI commands > like > > "voicemail reload", then I say that we should: > > > > 1) Start a janitor project to go through the code base and implement > "foo > > reload" CLI commands for _every_ module that implements a reload module > callback > > function. > > > > 2) Mark the "module reload res_foo.so" syntax as deprecated and > eventually > > completely remove it. This syntax was always confusing to me when I > started > > with Asterisk, because I thought it was equivalent to "module unload / > module load". > > > > -- > > Russell Bryant > > Senior Software Engineer > > Open Source Team Lead > > Digium, Inc. > > > > ___ > > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- > > > > asterisk-dev mailing list > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > >http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev > > > > > -- > Eliel Sardañons > > ___ > --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- > > asterisk-dev mailing list > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev > ___ --Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com-- asterisk-dev mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev
