Well, it's been awhile and no decision on this topic. I am very curious if anyone here is developing real products based on arduino (due/mega).
And Christian, FYI (https://wiki.iotivity.org/hardware). Raspberry PI(3/zero), and Intel Galileo (not that cheap) are equally cheap and small. Back to the subject.. I think dropping support for Arduino will benefit everyone - Increase maintainability(code and build system cleanup), faster CI and less headaches for project managers. I've found this opened/unresolved tickets on Jira, most of them pending for more than 1 year. IOT-39 => Client did not find servers with different resource type IOT-56 => TBStack on Arduino running as Client cannot utilize multicast functionality. IOT-60 => Duplicated observe requests from the same client generate duplicated notifications IOT-401 => Current build requires dos2unix but is not checking for the dependency IOT-440 => Make IoTivity CLOEXEC-safe IOT-479 => Getting started Guide for Linux and Arduino is still referencing make command to build, it should be updated to scons IOT-483 => Arduino WiFi-Shield workaround instruction needs to be documented IOT-484 => Master stability: Arduino Ethernet failed to respond after long run IOT-494 => Opportunities for simplifying CSDK *(This seems to be a very important ticket ?)* IOT-655 => [0.9.2-dev] Arduino: No response on GET for unavailable resource IOT-670 => Miss/skip notification of sequence number(s) for OBS query during multicast CON all observe IOT-675 => [0.9.2-dev] Arduino: Memory issue on PUT and Observe IOT-716 => 1.0.0-RC2 Stability: Observe notifications get lost significantly in IPv4 and IPv6 mixed evironment IOT-1386 => Fail to publish resource after deleting the published resource from rd IOT-1688 => Iotivity Resource Discovery Fails for embedded platform (like Arduino) when iotivity ocserver is built with TCP IOT-1881 => Arduino mega is not working on master branch, 1.2-rel is ok On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 4:32 AM, Christian Gran <gran at lynxtechnology.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I understand that the comon opinion is that Arduino is not needed as no > one is doing devices with it. > This is true - agreed. > One question: What is the chipset that IoTivity supports, that is equally > cheap and small and actually used for IoT devices? > If that exists, +2 from me for dropping Arduino. > > thanks > Christian > > > > On 4 Mar 2017, at 00:58, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com> > wrote: > > > > Em sexta-feira, 3 de mar?o de 2017, ?s 06:36:17 PST, Matta Jayaram > escreveu: > >> Dear Team, > >> Should IoTivity Arduino support be dropped? > > > > In my opinion, yes. > > > >> Before answering above question , > >> > >> 1.we know that arduino Wifi / Ethernet shield will not support > multicast. > > > > That is currently a problem, but one that I plan to fix with a > Constrained > > profile. Constrained devices should not be required to listen on > multicast. > > They should also be allowed to shut down their radios for extended > periods of > > time. > > > >> > >> 2.Even if we use unicast also we are unable to create multiple resouces > >> with it (1.a/fan,2.a/light...etc) > > > > Why not? That has nothing to do with the hardware, only the amount of > > resources permitted. And besides, certain devices may not need more than > one > > resource anyway (in addition to the OCF-mandated ones). > > > >> 3.Unable to process payload more than 255 bytes > > > > That could be a problem. > > > >> 4.When IoTivity client is Performing Discovery its destination address > is > >> always 4097. > > > > Address? Do you mean port number? And why is this a factor? > > > >> if you Drop the Arduino Boards Support No problem, But if you > >> Drop the Arduino SDK support then as per my understanding we are unable > to > >> Build IoTivity for Arduino SDK Supported Boards like > ESP8266,nrf5XX....etc > >> Modules. > > > > Right. As I've said multiple times, I don't think it's useful for us to > spend > > time maintaiing support for the Arduino SDK. I will say once again why: > > > > No one thinking seriously of making devices uses them. > > > > Arduino never leads to products and I can say this after talking to a > lot of > > people. It never proceeds further than a proof-of-concept phase. > > > >> If you provide Arduino SDK Support on IoTivity - Constrained > >> side then it's ok > > > > No one is volunteering to do that. > > > > If someone volunteers and the changes to Constrained do not otherwise > hinder > > or pollute the codebase, it can be accepted. > > > > -- > > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com > > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center > > > > _______________________________________________ > > iotivity-dev mailing list > > iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org > > https://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 > -- *Thiago Guedes Cunha de Moura* Graduando em Ci?ncia da Computa??o Instituto de Ci?ncias Exatas e Biol?gicas - Universidade Federal de Ouro Preto cel.: (31)99484-9864 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20170322/4725c7be/attachment.html>
