Dmitry Bely schreef:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 3:08 PM, Avi Marcus <avi@avimarcus.net> wrote:
Hmm, looking at your log and mine from the past, you appear to be correct. It looks like break=never means to ignore the condition. So then.. I'm left with the original question - what's the point?
I can only replicate my answer to the original poster:
It makes sense if you use the form
<condition wday="1" break="never"> (some actions) </condition>
And another - how can you do groups of conditions, like I intended to show in the example? I tried setting it to break on-false, or break on-true, but I can never get to the second condition set. Am I supposed to create it as separate extensions?
Probably so.
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Dmitry Bely <dmitry.bely@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 1:01 PM, Avi Marcus <avi@avimarcus.net> wrote:
You need ALL the conditions to match for freeswitch to do the action, and you can't change that!
I don't think so. If some condition evaluates to true, its nested actions are always executed no matter what preceded it. But of course the condition should be evaluated first, that's where various break values come into play.
No way - the dialplan is always run on a "match all conditions" to do the actions! How else would multiple conditions EVER work?
Completely wrong. And I don't see relevant logs in your message. Here is mine. A dialplan fragment:
<extension name="condition-test"> <condition wday="6" break="never"/> <condition hour="9-18" break="on-true"> <action application="info"/> </condition> </extension>
log:
Dialplan: sofia/internal/1000@192.168.121.66 parsing [default->condition-test] continue=false Dialplan: sofia/internal/1000@192.168.121.66 Date/Time Match (FAIL) [condition-test] break=never Dialplan: sofia/internal/1000@192.168.121.66 Date/Time Match (PASS) [condition-test] break=on-true Dialplan: sofia/internal/1000@192.168.121.66 Action info()
Guess what? The first condition fails but the action is still scheduled for execution (and indeed executed later)
I can't/didn't contribute much to this discussion, but I do follow it. My idea and (little) testing experience supports the explanation of Dimitry. Either way, it 'proofs' there is confusion about the working of the 'break' in condition tags. If I can find the time, I will try to do some tests / build an example myself. Thank you both for the answers and insights so far. regards, Egbert.