Summary:	ASTERISK-26032: Pause with reason "wrap-up" for after-call-work
Reporter:	Troy Bowman (troy)	Labels:
Date Opened:	2016-05-17 17:14:09	Date Closed:	2016-05-19 11:16:10
Priority:	Minor	Regression?
Status:	Closed/Complete	Components:	Applications/app_queue
Versions:	13.9.1	Frequency of Occurrence
Related Issues:
Environment:		Attachments:
Description:	I'm staging this enhancement in 13.9 (where I tested it) for preliminary consideration. Adds another queues.conf option named pause_wrapup_after_complete. This allows automatic pausing with the reason "wrap-up" after completed queue calls.  The agent would then have to use another interface to un-pause when they are ready to accept another call.  This is necessary when after-call wrap-up time might require making calls to other parties, among many other possibilities.  Management can then use the wrap-up pause time in queue reporting to gauge after-call-work time.  Defaults to 'no'. The wrapuptime option in queues.conf is still used when the agent comes back from their wrap-up pause, to allow them to re-pause.  For example, if they need to pause for a break immediately after finishing their after-call-work, they can use the seconds in wrapuptime to go on break, instead instantly receiving the next waiting call.
Comments:	By: Asterisk Team (asteriskteam) 2016-05-17 17:14:09.887-0500 Thanks for creating a report! The issue has entered the triage process. That means the issue will wait in this status until a Bug Marshal has an opportunity to review the issue. Once the issue has been reviewed you will receive comments regarding the next steps towards resolution. A good first step is for you to review the [Asterisk Issue Guidelines|https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Asterisk+Issue+Guidelines] if you haven't already. The guidelines detail what is expected from an Asterisk issue report. Then, if you are submitting a patch, please review the [Patch Contribution Process|https://wiki.asterisk.org/wiki/display/AST/Patch+Contribution+Process]. By: Troy Bowman (troy) 2016-05-18 11:28:17.267-0500 Sorry if I went about this wrong.  This is my first attempt at submitting a patch -- I'm a noob. My purpose for this submission was primarily to see if a change like this would even be desired and accepted.  If it is something Digium is willing to accept, I can make any necessary changes.  I guess I should have added it to 14. The reason for the separation of commits is to allow you to easily see specific changes in the code.  I can roll them up for the real deal. By: Joshua C. Colp (jcolp) 2016-05-18 11:36:57.014-0500 If you'd like specific feedback on whether it's something useful for the community then the asterisk-dev and asterisk-users mailing lists would be the place to go. From a policy perspective provided the code does not introduce regressions, is documented, doesn't cause any problems, and in the case of 13 has a test, it can go in. By: Joshua C. Colp (jcolp) 2016-05-18 11:37:21.013-0500 As well Digium aren't the ones who decide, everyone participates in code review. By: Troy Bowman (troy) 2016-05-19 11:13:18.011-0500 Okay, I'm sorry for wasting your time.  It looks like the patch has been "abandoned" in gerrit.  Is that all we have to do to remove this? By: Troy Bowman (troy) 2016-05-19 11:16:10.071-0500 Closing: Won't fix. Needs more due diligence.