Summary:ASTERISK-12524: [patch] [sound] Ability to force forwarding WITH comment
Reporter:James Rothenberger (jaroth)Labels:
Date Opened:2008-08-05 14:25:22Date Closed:2011-06-07 14:03:09
Versions:Frequency of
Environment:Attachments:( 0) forcecomment.patch
Description:This patch adds a configuration keyword to the voicemail.conf file called "forcecomment".  The default is "no".  When set to "yes", voicemail users will not be given the choice to forward with comment or forward without comment.  Voicemail will go right into recording the comment.
Comments:By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2008-08-05 16:39:36

Not a feature that we're willing to implement at this time.

By: Mark Michelson (mmichelson) 2008-08-07 11:15:01


The patch itself is fine, but I'm worried about the user experience when this option is enabled. I think there needs to be a sound prompt for the user explaining that he/she is adding a comment to a forwarded message. This is especially the case for non-IMAP users since after pressing 8 to forward a message, they will immediately be prompted with a beep and no further explanation. Even IMAP users, though they hear the voicemail intro, will not necessarily know that what they're being asked to record is a comment for the forwarded message.

I would suggest a sound prompt along the following lines:

"At the sound of the tone, please record a prepended comment for the message."

By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2008-08-07 13:29:46

The problem with this is that it's a policy question masquerading as a feature patch.  Note that it's very simple to evade the requirement of a prepend: even 20ms of prepended sound counts as a prepend succeeding.

The only way to succeed with such a policy question is simply to require your staff to prepend a message, and enforcing this policy.  It is otherwise an ineffective solution.

By: Criss Keating (crissk) 2008-08-07 13:37:47

I think we're more concerned with how and forwarded message without a comment works.  

Forwarded without a comment:

I receive a message from Digium saying "Criss, we approved the patch.  Have a great weekend."  

I forward that message to my colleague, Jim.  Jim receives a message from Digium that says, "Criss, we approved the patch.  Have a great weekend."  

It's hard to understand that message if you're Jim.  So, what we want to do is make forwarding messages without a comment a configuration paramater that we can disable locally in favor of forwarding a message with a comment.

Does that make any more sense?


By: Tilghman Lesher (tilghman) 2008-08-07 14:01:21

I'm not sure what you mean by "a configuration parameter than we can disable locally".  How is this any different from the current situation where a prompt is given, offering the user a chance to prepend a message?

Okay, nevermind.  I think I see: you're using the option in a negative way, where enabling the option is disabling the feature.

By: Criss Keating (crissk) 2008-08-07 14:04:31

It's different in that we wanted to disable the option for users to not prepend the message.

By: Criss Keating (crissk) 2008-08-15 09:55:48

Thanks for all the feedback on this.  We're going to cancel this patch and go with the default code.  Please close this out when you have time.