Summary:ASTERISK-09201: [patch] improving asterisk's general labels in menuselect
Reporter:Caio Begotti (caio1982)Labels:
Date Opened:2007-04-05 12:55:46Date Closed:2007-05-30 00:17:06
Versions:Frequency of
Environment:Attachments:( 0) asterisk_menuselect_labels_2.diff
( 1) asterisk_menuselect_labels.diff
( 2) bug9477_2.diff
Description:I understand that real bugs are more important, but in case you guys think it does fit... here it is. I don't know if you will ever agree with some changes, though. Also, I hope the addtion I made in chan_vpb.c is okay...

By the way, wouldn't it be nice to have a unique XML file for Asterisk's menuselect just like Zaptel's?


Related to http://bugs.digium.com/view.php?id=9450
Comments:By: Jason Parker (jparker) 2007-04-05 13:16:18

Most of it looks fine, but I'm not sure about the morsecode, jingle, or zapras descriptions.  Could you maybe revisit those and come up with alternative text?  "Fixing" morsecode would probably be as easy as removing the 's' from the end of your description.  Maybe I'm just being picky.

Also, I'm not sure about chan_vpb..

By: Caio Begotti (caio1982) 2007-04-05 13:33:52

Morse: "Morse code playback application"
Jingle: "Google's P2P signalling for multimedia sessions"
ZapRas: "Executes an application through ISDN RAS" (I just grabbed the original sentence from its .c file)

About chan_vpb, do you think it'd worth to remove the parenthesis content from it or what?
Anyway, thanks for considering this! I'm starting in small moves...

By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2007-04-05 14:46:01

Your change to the SHELL() dialplan function is inaccurate.  This is not a system call; it is an execution of a shell command.

SIP should be "channel support", not "channels support".

In Zapras, the "Executes a" is superfluous.

The stack description is awkward.  A better one might be "Dialplan subroutines".

As "Morse" is a name, it should always be capitalized, and yes, "code", not "codes".

The description for channelredirect is no more clear as to its purpose.  It is to redirect OTHER channels to a new location in the dialplan.

SayUnixTime should not be changed.  It only says the time in a custom format or timezone, if specified.  Those arguments are optional.  In the general case, it says the date and time.

In ENUM, you dropped "dialplan" from "dialplan functions".  "Dialplan function" means something very specific; please don't change this.

The func_odbc description is awkward.  In fact, whereas the application descriptions are generally descriptive of functionality, there's a few of the
dialplan functions which aren't.  If we're going to change them, we should be consistent.

res_config_* are REALTIME backend drivers.

res_limit is NOT using ulimit.  It's using setrlimit.

By: Caio Begotti (caio1982) 2007-04-05 15:06:42

Hi, Corydon

- I didn't change anything regarding Realtime in res_config_*, so I didn't understand your comment on it. Should I add a "realtime" mention to it?

- I believe I misunderstood the ulimit part; what I wanted to mean is that it uses a ulimit-like set of flags to limit the resources usage.

- About the func_* I didn't understand whether it's better to change my descriptions back or if it'd be better to change all the others func_* descriptions to make them more descriptive of functionality.

- I still prefer the new SayUnixTime description, but I got your point :-)

What should I do with all the others corrections you guys made? Update the .diff and that's all?

By: Caio Begotti (caio1982) 2007-04-05 15:10:37

As a sidenote, I just started that because I needed to know every module available in order to disable them and reduce the total binary size of Asterisk for a pet project on embedded stuff. I don't know yet if it's ok to write such long descriptions in menuselect labels...

By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2007-04-06 09:10:46

You need to make a new patch which includes or addresses all of the criticisms.

By: Caio Begotti (caio1982) 2007-04-06 13:09:55

Done! I hope I didn't forget anything

By: Caio Begotti (caio1982) 2007-04-26 07:52:09

Didn't my latest patch include all the criticisms made?

By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2007-04-29 22:27:33

This is the portion that I'm willing to commit.

By: Caio Begotti (caio1982) 2007-05-03 07:40:52

Although I believe there's no problem with many changes removed in bug9477_2.diff (15 counted), it's up to you guys to decide the portion you think is alright to commit from the suggestions made. The patch bug9477_2.diff is fine... thanks.

By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2007-05-30 00:17:06

Committed in 66585.