Re: renaming updateIce

On 05/08/2014 06:22 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
> Sounds like consensus for:
>
>   setConfiguration(config), where config obliterates the existing 
> configuration, regardless of what was filled in in |config|.
>
> Can we make a bug for this or edit this in?

I created https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=25596 to make 
sure we remember.

>
>
> On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Harald Alvestrand 
> <harald@alvestrand.no <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no>> wrote:
>
>     On 05/03/2014 02:06 AM, Justin Uberti wrote:
>>     That's my preference at the moment. Simple and straightforward.
>
>     It's also consistent with how constraints are specified.
>     It's nice if we don't have to be different just to be different.
>
>
>>
>>
>>     On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey
>>     <jib@mozilla.com <mailto:jib@mozilla.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         On 5/2/14 4:47 PM, cowwoc wrote:
>>>         Or, use a different dictionary for the initial configuration
>>>         and updating an existing configuration. The former would
>>>         have defaults. The latter would not. Or just use the Builder
>>>         pattern :)
>>
>>         Or use the pattern that Justin mentioned:
>>
>>           var config = pc.getConfiguration();
>>           config.iceTransports = "foo";
>>           pc.setConfiguration(cfg);
>>
>>         and leave it to the implementation to figure out what changed
>>         (which isn't difficult).
>>
>>>         Gili
>>
>>         .: Jan-Ivar :.
>>
>>
>
>