Just spent a little while debugging an issue and root causing it to what I think is a confusing argument name, though forgive me that I do not have a broad understanding of the codebase.
The signature of LocalParticipant.unpublish_track follows:
Given this signature, I was under the impression that I would want to use the sid of the track supplied to the corresponding call to LocalParticipant.publish_track. As it turns out, it is not the Track.sid that satisfies this argument, but the TrackPublication.sid. In fact, the Track.sid and TrackPublication.track.sid will both be TR_unknown, which is not useful. Perhaps there would be a minor improvement in readability with track_publication_sid instead of track_sid as the argument name?
Just spent a little while debugging an issue and root causing it to what I think is a confusing argument name, though forgive me that I do not have a broad understanding of the codebase.
The signature of
LocalParticipant.unpublish_track
follows:Given this signature, I was under the impression that I would want to use the
sid
of thetrack
supplied to the corresponding call toLocalParticipant.publish_track
. As it turns out, it is not theTrack.sid
that satisfies this argument, but theTrackPublication.sid
. In fact, theTrack.sid
andTrackPublication.track.sid
will both beTR_unknown
, which is not useful. Perhaps there would be a minor improvement in readability withtrack_publication_sid
instead oftrack_sid
as the argument name?