W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > May 2014

Re: Update of RTCRtpSender "doohickey" proposal

From: Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 02 May 2014 09:18:22 -0400
Message-ID: <53639B1E.8080506@gmail.com>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:40 UTC