Re: [Suspected Junk Mail] New functionality in PR - priority

I think I understand how the proposal works, but if you could outline 
the discrete problems we need to address - without presupposing a 
specific solution - then I would appreciate it, as I think this would 
let us:

 1. Consider the merits of the proposal in addressing the stated
    problems vs. API inconvenience, and
 2. Judge proposals against something concrete other than the merits of
    the current lone proposal.


Thanks,

.: Jan-Ivar :.

On 5/29/15 12:03 PM, Peter Thatcher wrote:
>
> I believe you have brought this up, and I and others have explained 
> the purposes of the design on many different threads on the list the 
> last few weeks. And I believe we have explained it fairly completely 
> already. Do you want me to repeat the reasons in this email thread?
>
> On May 29, 2015 6:36 AM, "Jan-Ivar Bruaroey" <jib@mozilla.com 
> <mailto:jib@mozilla.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 5/28/15 11:02 AM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>>
>>      ... all settings need to be part of RtpParameters so changes can
>>     be applied all at once.
>>
>
>     This seems unnecessarily complicated and novel vs. natural
>     attributes, so I'd like proponents to explain exactly what
>     problems they are compensating for (concurrency?), as well as what
>     the desired properties are (transaction? async return values?)
>
>     .: Jan-Ivar :.
>