Channel Linking

[Mopquill]

When we switched our server over from Mumble to TeamSpeak 3, we weighed the pros and cons of each, and eventually came to a decision for TeamSpeak. However, one of the things nearly everybody missed was channel linking. Channel linking is the ability of people with the permission (generally staff and trusted users) to link multiple channels together without moving people. At first glance, you might just suggest that everyone gets moved or uses a whisper list, but moving takes time (even with a plugin), and afterward, you have to remember who was where, and move them all back individually. Whisper lists have the downfall of only being one-way, and the channel you're actually in wouldn't hear you, thus effectively acting as if you'd moved to another channel. Not to mention, they require configuration beforehand, and you don't always know where people are going to be.

Channel linking is far more convenient, in that it allows users to link with several channels. Suppose there are 5 users in Channel A, 5 users in Channel B, and 5 users in Channel C. Rather than moving 10 users from channels B and C to channel A, you could simply right-click Channel B and click "Link", and do the same for Channel C. Now all 15 users can participate in a discussion that involves them all. Say the users in Channel B want out of the discussion, you can quickly unlink just channel B, and the remaining 10 users in Channels A and C can continue the discussion. Or, if all three (or more, channel-linking limits can be defined in Permissions) channels have completed their discussion, you can simple "Unlink All" and return it to the way it was. This is especially helpful with many sets of users spread over several channels. You don't have to move people one-by-one, or remember who was in which channel, etc. It streamlines the process greatly. Not to mention, with permissions, you could deny it from users who might attempt to abuse it, or completely disable it on your server altogether.

I realize this is a large feature request, and if accepted and implemented, wouldn't be in TeamSpeak until 3.1.X or possibly even further, but, I definitely think it's a great feature, and it's certainly worth having. Thanks to anyone who has taken the time to read this.

[chibisuke]

Channel linking in mumble was quite convenient yes, but it was also a bitch to configure when you wanted to do advanced stuff with it.

For teamspeak... yea I do like the idea of having it there, but would implment it a bit different here.

Admins should be able to link channels, but without any effect at first. Then the "Talk to channel link group" could be a special option of the whisperlist, so you bind a seperate hotkey there. (In mumble you had to use permissions to limit talking to the link to the talk2 key).

Then you'd need to have a channel permission "Required Talk power via link" and a user permission for "Talk power via link" so you can limit the users who are allowed to use the link, but which one special condition. When a talk to channel link fails for one channel, it doesn't mean it fails for the others as well. So in case of a link of 3 channels, you might be allowed to talk to two of them, but not to the 3rd one.

Of course Priority speeker, has to work over channel links as well, as you not nescessarily know if somebody is talking in the other channels.

[Mopquill]

Channel linking in mumble was quite convenient yes, but it was also a bitch to configure when you wanted to do advanced stuff with it.

What on earth was difficult about it? There was nothing to configure; it worked out of the box. You right click another channel and select "Link" to link it to your channel, and select "Unlink" or "Unlink All" to unlink it (or others, as the need should arise).

For teamspeak... yea I do like the idea of having it there, but would implment it a bit different here.

Admins should be able to link channels, but without any effect at first. Then the "Talk to channel link group" could be a special option of the whisperlist, so you bind a seperate hotkey there. (In mumble you had to use permissions to limit talking to the link to the talk2 key).

Then you'd need to have a channel permission "Required Talk power via link" and a user permission for "Talk power via link" so you can limit the users who are allowed to use the link, but which one special condition. When a talk to channel link fails for one channel, it doesn't mean it fails for the others as well. So in case of a link of 3 channels, you might be allowed to talk to two of them, but not to the 3rd one.

Of course Priority speeker, has to work over channel links as well, as you not nescessarily know if somebody is talking in the other channels.

This all sounds wayy too complicated, and further decreases the risk that it'll even be considered for adding. Further optional complexity, for those that want it, is fine, but I don't want the crux of my idea undermined by it, as I really don't think the majority of users would be interested in that, or use it. I suggest you make your own suggestion thread, as I'm viewing your post as an attempt to complicate this feature as a way to cause it to be rejected. :-/

[dante696]

I have created a ticket for this request, but we try to add this feature for voice packets only.

Internal ticket ID: TSSERVER-48

[Mopquill]

I have created a ticket for this request, but we try to add this feature for voice packets only.

Internal ticket ID: TSSERVER-48

Woo! I'm totally psyched that this feature has a chance.

What do you mean by "but we try to add this feature for voice packets only?" I'm not sure I understand the wording there, sorry. =[

[dante696]

With voice pakets i mean, the voice of users. So They can Talk to A, B and channel C at the same time without whispering.
We don't wan't to add a big admin tool for this. This would be an overload.

[Mopquill]

With voice pakets i mean, the voice of users. So They can Talk to A, B and channel C at the same time without whispering.
We don't wan't to add a big admin tool for this. This would be an overload.

Ah, okay- my suggestion, instead of the addendum provided by chibisuke. Very cool. Thanks very much for your help, dante696. =]

[dante696]

The issue we see here, that this would be an overload for our client and not everyone is a pro user :-/

[Mopquill]

Oh, I agree. I think the admin stuff over-complicates things. I just want the very simple "Link Channel", "Unlink Channel", and "Unlink All" options. Sorry if you misunderstood me; I was agreeing with you in my last post, too. =]

EDIT: Unless you're saying you think that the basic concept of channel linking would be an overload, in which case I most certainly do not agree. I think it's quite simple and straight-forward, and I don't think it'd interfere with anyone not wanting to use it. =]

[Screech]

My first question is how are you going to show this in the client GUI? Color coded icons to the right with a CL or chain links logo in it comes to mind. Only problem I see with that is you limit a server's max channel link groups to the number of color coded icons you add. Also, will a channel be allowed into 2 linked groups at once?

What needed talk power is used, or is that still managed on the channel the user is in?

[Mopquill]

My only question is how are you going to show this in the client GUI? Color coded icons to the right with a CL or chain links logo in it comes to mind. Only problem I see with that is you limit a server's max channel link groups to the number of color coded icons you add. Also, will a channel be allowed into 2 linked groups at once?

I'm not certain I understand what you mean. In any event, you know the icon that appears next to a user when you whisper to them? Linked channels would be the same sort of thing. Any channels linked to the channel you're in would have a linked-chain (or some such) icon, so you know which channels are linked to your channel. Any channels not linked to your channel aren't important; you don't need to know their link status since you're not in them. If they choose to put that information in the channel panel, then you could see which channels are linked to a channel 'A' by clicking Channel A and reading the panel, but that's not necessary.

By linked groups, do you mean "linked channel groups?" If so, then the answer is "sort of". All channels in a linked channel group should be linked to each other, such that everyone in any link channel can hear everyone else in any linked channel. Suppose that Channels A, B, and C were linked, and channels D, E, and F were linked. If any channel from A, B, or C was linked to any channel of D, E, or F, all six channels would now be linked. It wouldn't make sense to have to add mutual links, such that everyone was not necessarily hearing the same things.

[Mopquill]

Is this still on the To-Do list? Most of my members are excitedly waiting for this feature, and I want to make sure I'm still correct in saying that it will be included in a future version. Thanks.

[nwerensteijn]

Yes this is still on the todo list. Regrettably we will not have time to implement it this year.

[Mopquill]

Yes this is still on the todo list. Regrettably we will not have time to implement it this year.

Okay, cool. I'm happy to hear that it's still in the works -- thanks for the quick reply. =]