LinuxMCE Forums
May 19, 2013, 06:09:19 pm GMT-1 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: Rule #1 - Be Patient - Rule #2 - Don't ask when, if you don't contribute - Rule #3 - You have coding skills - LinuxMCE's small brother is available: http://www.agocontrol.com
 
   Home   Help Search Chat Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: General voicemail and intercom/broadcast feature  (Read 1008 times)
jeangot
Guru
****
Posts: 233


View Profile
« on: June 12, 2008, 03:41:35 am »

Hello,

couldn't find the answers for the following anywhere:

1. Is there any way to retrieve voicemails left in the general house voicemail box (100) somewhere on orbiters? The orbiters show messages left for each users, which is great, but for some reaosn I don't see how to retrieve global messages. To me it would have made sense if a global message would show up in every user's box or something like that

2. Is the "broadcast to all MDs" feature in intercom supposed to be working? When I try it, I hear "this is not a valid conference number" from Asteirsk. I work a lot with Asterisk so I can dig deeper, but first I wanted to make sure that this feature is supposed to be working in 0710, since I read in an old post that it wasn't.

Thank you!

Jean
Logged
tschak909
LinuxMCE God
****
Posts: 5101

DOES work for LinuxMCE.


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2008, 07:16:52 pm »

yeah, there needs to be some work done to tie the general mailbox to the orbiters. We can pattern this off the per-user code that's already there..

As for the intercom feature, telecom took a slight regression going from 0704 to 0710 while improving in a lot of areas. We need some talented asterisk people to dig in and help fix some of the regressions :-)

-Thom
Logged
bulek
Administrator
wants to work for LinuxMCE
*****
Posts: 868

Living with LMCE


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2008, 09:19:41 pm »

yeah, there needs to be some work done to tie the general mailbox to the orbiters. We can pattern this off the per-user code that's already there..

As for the intercom feature, telecom took a slight regression going from 0704 to 0710 while improving in a lot of areas. We need some talented asterisk people to dig in and help fix some of the regressions :-)

-Thom

Hi,

I'm probably not talented at all, but can try to help -  I do have some limited Asterisk experience. I remember that once there was a check list for Telecom features. Does anyone have it ? Identifying problems could be the first step...

But I would probably need also some help from experienced LMCE developers.... I've also been told that version of Asterisk under LMCE is considered "unstable" from those that are using it in production systems...

HTH,

regards,

Bulek.
Logged

Thanks in advance,

regards,

Bulek.
tschak909
LinuxMCE God
****
Posts: 5101

DOES work for LinuxMCE.


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2008, 09:23:18 pm »

er, know any more specifics? it works fine for me.

-Thom
Logged
bulek
Administrator
wants to work for LinuxMCE
*****
Posts: 868

Living with LMCE


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: June 13, 2008, 12:14:39 pm »

er, know any more specifics? it works fine for me.

-Thom

Hi,

sorry have no specifics. Guy only said like ("versions before x.y. are considered unstable for our purposes"). But I guess that those problems won't even appear under LMCE deployment of Asterisk... But anyway, if I remember right, Asterisk under LMCE is quite a mess (I remember quite dirty package building script, etc...) and I know that there was some discussion on this matter - main thoughts were in "start from scratch and build new" direction and if that will happen, then upgrade of Asterisk and FreePbx will be probably reasonable.... But as said, I don't know much about package building etc....

Regards,

Bulek.
 
Logged

Thanks in advance,

regards,

Bulek.
Zaerc
Alumni
LinuxMCE God
*
Posts: 2256


Department of Redundancy Department.


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: June 13, 2008, 01:31:34 pm »

...
Hi,

sorry have no specifics. Guy only said like ("versions before x.y. are considered unstable for our purposes"). But I guess that those problems won't even appear under LMCE deployment of Asterisk... But anyway, if I remember right, Asterisk under LMCE is quite a mess (I remember quite dirty package building script, etc...) and I know that there was some discussion on this matter - main thoughts were in "start from scratch and build new" direction and if that will happen, then upgrade of Asterisk and FreePbx will be probably reasonable.... But as said, I don't know much about package building etc....

Regards,

Bulek.
 

Where did this discussion take place?
Logged

"Change is inevitable. Progress is optional."
-- Anonymous

bulek
Administrator
wants to work for LinuxMCE
*****
Posts: 868

Living with LMCE


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: June 15, 2008, 11:17:37 pm »

...
Hi,

sorry have no specifics. Guy only said like ("versions before x.y. are considered unstable for our purposes"). But I guess that those problems won't even appear under LMCE deployment of Asterisk... But anyway, if I remember right, Asterisk under LMCE is quite a mess (I remember quite dirty package building script, etc...) and I know that there was some discussion on this matter - main thoughts were in "start from scratch and build new" direction and if that will happen, then upgrade of Asterisk and FreePbx will be probably reasonable.... But as said, I don't know much about package building etc....

Regards,

Bulek.
 

Where did this discussion take place?

Hi,

it was informal phone conversation with some guy I know he's technician for Asterisk systems in Slovenian Company. But as far as I remember, there were always some recomendations which versions of Asterisk are considered more and which less stable... But have no recent info on that...

Regards,

Bulek.
Logged

Thanks in advance,

regards,

Bulek.
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!