---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/
---
(Updated April 17, 2015, 3:45 p.m.)
Status
--
This change has been
On April 13, 2015, 2:41 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
So I think this looks pretty good. Next steps:
* We've migrated to git. Take a look at [1] for information on how to use
gerrit to post a git review. Don't worry you won't be facing the full
review again, we've already dealt with
On April 13, 2015, 7:41 p.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
So I think this looks pretty good. Next steps:
* We've migrated to git. Take a look at [1] for information on how to use
gerrit to post a git review. Don't worry you won't be facing the full
review again, we've already dealt with
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/#review15190
---
So I think this looks pretty good. Next steps:
* We've
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/
---
(Updated April 13, 2015, 5 p.m.)
Review request for Asterisk Developers.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/#review15168
---
/trunk/main/cli.c
On April 3, 2015, 5:37 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
/trunk/main/manager.c, line 4873
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/diff/3/?file=72904#file72904line4873
If we successfully ran the command, it seems unsafe to claim failure.
We have to assume the the caller doesn't actually
On April 3, 2015, 6:37 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
/trunk/main/manager.c, line 4873
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/diff/3/?file=72904#file72904line4873
If we successfully ran the command, it seems unsafe to claim failure.
We have to assume the the caller doesn't actually
On April 3, 2015, 11:37 p.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
/trunk/main/manager.c, line 4873
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/diff/3/?file=72904#file72904line4873
If we successfully ran the command, it seems unsafe to claim failure.
We have to assume the the caller doesn't
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/
---
(Updated April 9, 2015, 5:05 p.m.)
Review request for Asterisk
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/#review15039
---
/trunk/main/manager.c
On March 25, 2015, 9:24 a.m., Corey Farrell wrote:
/trunk/main/manager.c, lines 4908-4911
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/diff/2/?file=72690#file72690line4908
astman_start_ack(s, m) seems to be the standard way to begin success
responses. We would send Response: Success
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/#review14781
---
I like this change mostly as is. Since we are talking about
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/
---
(Updated March 20, 2015, 2:34 a.m.)
Review request for Asterisk
On Jan. 30, 2015, 1:22 a.m., George Joseph wrote:
If you run the Testsuite, you'll get a good indication of whether this is
truly backwards compatible.
gareth wrote:
I ran the test apps/queue/set_penalty which makes use of ami.command and
it failed.
However this
On Jan. 29, 2015, 7:22 p.m., George Joseph wrote:
If you run the Testsuite, you'll get a good indication of whether this is
truly backwards compatible.
gareth wrote:
I ran the test apps/queue/set_penalty which makes use of ami.command and
it failed.
However this
On Jan. 30, 2015, 1:22 a.m., George Joseph wrote:
If you run the Testsuite, you'll get a good indication of whether this is
truly backwards compatible.
gareth wrote:
I ran the test apps/queue/set_penalty which makes use of ami.command and
it failed.
However this
On Jan. 29, 2015, 8:22 p.m., George Joseph wrote:
If you run the Testsuite, you'll get a good indication of whether this is
truly backwards compatible.
gareth wrote:
I ran the test apps/queue/set_penalty which makes use of ami.command and
it failed.
However this
On Jan. 29, 2015, 8:22 p.m., George Joseph wrote:
If you run the Testsuite, you'll get a good indication of whether this is
truly backwards compatible.
gareth wrote:
I ran the test apps/queue/set_penalty which makes use of ami.command and
it failed.
However this
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/#review14384
---
If you run the Testsuite, you'll get a good indication of
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/4391/
---
Review request for Asterisk Developers.
Bugs: ASTERISK-24730
On Jan. 30, 2015, 1:22 a.m., George Joseph wrote:
If you run the Testsuite, you'll get a good indication of whether this is
truly backwards compatible.
I ran the test apps/queue/set_penalty which makes use of ami.command and it
failed.
However this appears to be a bug with starpy, it is
22 matches
Mail list logo
