716856 - Rename |active| to |activeCall| in nsIDOMTelephony.idl

Status: REOPENED

(Core :: DOM: Core & HTML, defect, P5)

Description

[Mounir Lamouri (:mounir)]

As said in bug 674726, |active| was too vague and |activeCall| should be used instead. See bug 674726 comment 52 and bug 674726 comment 53.

Comment 1

[Ben Turner (not reading bugmail, use the needinfo flag!)]

Sorry, I forgot to comment there, sicking and I decided that it has to stay 'active' because soon it may contain a group (conference call), not just a call.

Comment 2

[Mounir Lamouri (:mounir)]

How is a conference call not a call?

Comment 3

[Jonas Sicking (:sicking) No longer reading bugmail consistently]

It's not a Call object though.

Comment 4

[Mounir Lamouri (:mounir)]

(In reply to Jonas Sicking (:sicking) from comment #3)
> It's not a Call object though.

I'm not sure it really matters actually. Though, it seems weird to have a object representing a conference call that hasn't 'Call' in his name. Is the interface specified somewhere?

Comment 5

[Jonas Sicking (:sicking) No longer reading bugmail consistently]

We haven't defined multi-part calls yet so there's nothing written. I suspect we'll call it something like CallGroup which indeed has "call" in the name.

As a general principle I don't care too deeply about names, so I'm happy to let you guys fight this one out.

Comment 6

[Mounir Lamouri (:mounir)]

(In reply to Jonas Sicking (:sicking) from comment #5)
> As a general principle I don't care too deeply about names, so I'm happy to
> let you guys fight this one out.

Good names make good APIs and here |active| is too vague. The first though of any caller would be that |foo.active| means "is |foo| active?". However, it would return the active call. Thinking about it twice would probably make the caller understand. However, we want everyone to understand everything clearly and quickly I believe.

Comment 7

[Mounir Lamouri (:mounir)]

You guys are allowed to say I'm a bit stubborn :)

Comment 8

[Dietrich Ayala (:dietrich)]

Not blocking the release.

Comment 9

[Firefox Bug Husbandry Bot]

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1472046

Move all DOM bugs that haven’t been updated in more than 3 years and has no one currently assigned to P5.

If you have questions, please contact :mdaly.