Re: CTI Integration
"Sebastian Reitenbach" <[email protected]> Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:41:17 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.cms.opengroupware.discuss.general |
|---|---|
| Organization | L00 bugdead prods. |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
[email protected] wrote: > On Mar 28, 2007, at 12:49, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote: > > yes, they do, massively, assume some sales people, stuffed with a voip > > client on their notebook, connected via VPN to the company, or > > employees > > working at home, ... In my eyes, this is a rapidly growing group of > > telephone users, which not uses static assigned desktops to notebooks. > > Yes, but its still a very small minority. I suppose it isn't even 1% > of the installed PBXes, including VoIP ones. Whatever ... > > >> Yes. Its for inhouse operation. > > Terminal servers are used inhouse, at least what I mean with > > terminal server > > in the old unix style, e.g. a lot of people connect vi X or NX to a > > powerful > > station, to work on this one, If they access the groupware, they > > all come > > from that one IP address. I think this is also not too uncommon usage. > > Again, some people do this, but its obviously an even smaller > minority. And extremly uncommon (the far majority of users just have > a Windows PC). > > Anyways, I'm not complaining :-) If you want to add support for such > setups, feel free to do so! :-) OK, I'll do, I just wanted to make my point clear ;) > > > > I was already wondering, what this is used for, now I now ;P > > That looks pretty weird, but no. yes, indeed, ;P > > Assuming that your PBX has a common prefix (or suffix), you would > just check all the numbers of the account for that prefix and then > use that number to connect his phone. > Sounds like the obvious thing to do. I know what you mean, I think I will create a default, that contains the pattern that I will then match with the telephone numbers. > > > but when I then add a NSLog(@"blah whathever"); into the method in > > OpenGroupware+CTI.m I do not see the output on the command line > > showing up. > > Which obviously implies that the method isn't called. Can't say what > you did, use GDB to trace the flow. I'll do that later. thanks Sebastian -- OpenGroupware.org Discussion [email protected] http://mail.opengroupware.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss