the 'experimental' means Daniel Mihai's opinion like below: ======== 2. All C functions included under out/<path_to_IoTivity_SDK>/experimental/ are Experimental Public APIs
2017? 4? 7? (?) 23:24, ??? <uzchoi at samsung.com>?? ??: > What does `experimental` mean here? > Out of OCF spec scope or not officially managed item? > From OCF perspective, IPCA and Smart home API are compliant to spec. > BR Uze Choi. > > > ---------* Original Message* --------- > *Sender* : ??? <glen.kim at samsung.com> Senior Engineer/IoT Lab(S/W??)/???? > *Date* : 2017-04-07 22:48 (GMT+9) > > *Title* : Re: [dev] Public and Experimental Public C APIs > > I totally agree with Nash. > > I am developing more high-level apis in the "smarthome_api" branch. > > But, if Iotivity has a plan to maintain "experimental" in master branch, > I'll be able to put our new feature in master and receive many feedback and > interest. > > > > Glen Kim. > > > > --------- *Original Message* --------- > > *Sender* : Nash, George <george.nash at intel.com> > > *Date* : 2017-04-07 07:26 (GMT+9) > > *Title* : Re: [dev] Public and Experimental Public C APIs > > > > Inline [geo] > > > > *From:* iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org [mailto: > iotivity-dev-bounces at lists.iotivity.org] *On Behalf Of *Gregg Reynolds > *Sent:* Thursday, April 6, 2017 12:47 PM > *To:* Daniel Mihai <Daniel.Mihai at microsoft.com> > *Cc:* iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org > *Subject:* Re: [dev] Public and Experimental Public C APIs > > > > > > > > On Apr 6, 2017 2:09 PM, "Daniel Mihai via iotivity-dev" < > iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org> wrote: > > Should we start with the following definitions? > > 1. All C functions included under out/<path_to_IoTivity_SDK>/ are Public > APIs > 2. All C functions included under out/<path_to_IoTivity_SDK>/experimental/ > are Experimental Public APIs > > > > wait. the reason we have things like git is because it allows to avoid > this sort of thing (among other things). the main branch should _never_ > include experimental stuff, IMHO. that's what branches are for. > > > > [geo] problem with working on the experimental api?s in a branch is you > never get other developers to try that code. You may be working on > assumptions that just are not true. Moving from a branch to a master while > still labeling it as experimental has a lot of value. Being on master > should indicate that the code will run ?mostly? bug free. In this case > experimental is being used to indicate a level of maturity, i.e. it?s a new > feature that may need changing once it been used in a few really world > applications. It also allows API breaking changes without a long > deprecation process. > > > > At least this is the way that I see it being proposed. Maybe I am the one > miss reading. > > _______________________________________________ > iotivity-dev mailing listiotivity-dev at > lists.iotivity.orghttps://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev > > -------------------------------- > > *Glen YoungJin Kim* > > IoT Lab | Convergence Team | Software Center > > SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. > > 010-3356-9627 > > glen.kim at samsung.com > > _______________________________________________ > iotivity-dev mailing listiotivity-dev at > lists.iotivity.orghttps://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev > > > > > _______________________________________________ > iotivity-dev mailing list > iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org > https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20170407/5d2e6596/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 13402 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20170407/5d2e6596/attachment.gif>
