[Bug 31660] Undraft MergeableConference and Splittable

[bugzilla-daemon at freedesktop.org]

https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=31660

--- Comment #7 from Simon McVittie <simon.mcvittie at collabora.co.uk> 2010-12-01 10:13:51 PST ---
(In reply to comment #6)> Is there a particular reason to restrict merges to
one-to-one channels? Not
> that I'd like to handle conferences consisting of conferences..

Sanity? :-)

My understanding is that this is enough to represent every protocol we know
about (including GSM, with suitable definitions of a conference); we can always
add a flag for "this weird thing *also* works" later, if we need one.

My understanding is that we represent GSM conferences like this:

If Alice calls me, then calls Bob and merges the two calls, my GSM provider
tells me "this call with Alice has gained one or more conference participants"
(if anything), so I see this as a 1-1 call with the Conference_Host CallState
flag.

If I then call Chris and merge my call with Chris into my call with Alice,
*that* is where we start using a Telepathy Conference.

Am I right? Diagram:

            Telepathy Conference
      //================||=================\\
      ||                ||                 ||
      ||                ||                 ||
      ||                ||                 ||
    Chris ------------- me ---------------- Alice - - - - - - Bob
               ^        ||  ^ 1-1 Telepathy  || ^ not visible  ||
         1-1 Telepathy        Channel            in Telepathy
           Channel      ||                   ||                ||

                        \\ = = = = = = = = = ||= = = = = = = = //
                             ^ only visible as the Conference_Host flag

       ==== GSM conference
       ---- GSM call
       solid lines are Telepathy channels
       broken lines are not

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.freedesktop.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.