- From: Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 02 May 2014 09:18:22 -0400
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
I agree that implicit cloning is bad. However it might be worthwhile to remember why anyone ever thought it was a good idea, just so we don't miss anything. Was it to avoid the assigment of conflicting constraints/settings to the track in the different PCs (i.e. pre-doHickey)? On 5/2/2014 8:41 AM, Adam Bergkvist wrote: > On 2014-04-30 23:24, Martin Thomson wrote: >> On 30 April 2014 14:17, Jan-Ivar Bruaroey <jib@mozilla.com> wrote: >>> Hang on, Martin, are you talking about implicit cloning? Any implicit >>> cloning would be bad IMHO. >> >> I agree. >> >> But that was my inference from some of your email. If that wasn't >> your intention, then we can chalk this up to a misunderstanding then. > > I was also talking about explicit cloning with the clone() method. > > +1 on no implicit cloning. > > /Adam > > > -- Jim Barnett Genesys
Received on Friday, 2 May 2014 13:18:55 UTC