Re: [GnomeMeeting-devel-list] Increasing required time to answer a call: Opinion

[Damien Sandras <dsandras seconix com>]

Le sam 24/01/2004 à 01:18, Craig Southeren a écrit :

> A good question. I have seen the previous emails on the difficulty of
> using IP address or alias name as the basis of a deny function, and I
> agree that neither of these will work in all situations. However, not
> having any deny function is the worst case scenario - it forces users to
> manually deny EVERY call rather than there being some chance of denying
> SOME calls.
> 
> My response in this kind of situation is to provide the user with
> options. I can imagine a dialog like this:
> 
>    +--------------------------------------------+
>    | Incoming call from "fred" at 12.34.56.78   |
>    |                                            |
>    | Accept call?   Refuse call?    Options...  |
>    +--------------------------------------------+
> 
> The options dialog provides the following:
> 
>    +---------------------------------------------------+
>    | Forward all calls ?                               |
>    | Do not disturb?                                   |
>    |                                                   |
>    | Automatically refuse all calls from "fred" ?      |
>    | Automatically refuse all calls from 12.34.56.78 ? |
>    +---------------------------------------------------+
>    
> What do you think of this suggestion?
> 


That's a very good idea... We should code this for > 1.00.
(Actually there is a string freeze soon and also a GUI freeze. The GNOME
GUI freeze means that the GUI shouldn't change anymore after the
deadline for the freeze, and it is already over).

However, I keep the idea.


-- 
 _      Damien Sandras
(o-     
//\     It-Optics s.a.
v_/_    GnomeMeeting: http://www.gnomemeeting.org/
        FOSDEM 2004:  http://www.fosdem.org
        H.323 phone:  callto:ils.seconix.com/dsandras seconix com