AW: [DISCUSS] Having a in-person community meetup?

2023-01-12 Thread Philipp Zehnder
Hi all,

I find the idea very cool and would also like to participate.

Cheers,
Philipp

Von: Lukas Ott 
Datum: Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2023 um 11:56
An: dev@plc4x.apache.org 
Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Having a in-person community meetup?
If I can fit it into my schedule, count me in as well.

Lukas

Am Mi., 11. Jan. 2023 um 11:24 Uhr schrieb Christofer Dutz <
christofer.d...@c-ware.de>:

> So right now, I count 9 people (one of them planning on using TAC), right?
>
>
>   *   Ben Hucheson
>   *   Cesar Garcia (TAC)
>   *   Christofer Dutz
>   *   Dominik Riemer
>
>   *   Julian Feinauer (I guess)
>   *   Lukasz Dywicki
>   *   Niclas Hedhman
>   *   Niclas Merz
>   *   Willem Remie
>
> Anyone else? Or did I list someone in the wrong category?
>
> Chris
>
>
> From: Niklas Merz 
> Date: Wednesday, 11. January 2023 at 08:56
> To: dev@plc4x.apache.org 
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Having a in-person community meetup?
> On 2023-01-10 14:33, Christofer Dutz wrote:
> > So please speak up … who would be interested to come? And who would
> > need assistance and if yes: from where you would be coming.
>
> I would also consider attending on my own cost. Both Frankfurt and
> Stuttgart would be great options for me.
>


Re: [PROPOSAL] Add better PLC4X-API support for Input Dialogs

2020-05-29 Thread Philipp Zehnder
Hi,

this is a very cool idea and it would definitely improve the user experience 
for PLC4X.

Especially, the input validation and autocomplete for field addresses would be 
helpful for the StreamPipes integration.

Is it possible for some protocols to read a list of all available variables and 
if so, which ones?

So far, we decided to provide for each protocol an individual adapter. We 
thought this makes sense, because the naming and technical background of the 
protocols might differ.
(E.g. we provide a CSV upload for S7 PLCs, and I do not know if that would be 
possible for Modbus for example)
Does that make sense to you or do you have any alternative ideas?

Status of the PLC4X integration into StreamPipes:
Currently we support S7 and we are working on Modbus. 
@Chris you implemented an adapter for BACnet/IP, right?

Any ideas or suggestions what we should integrate next?

Philipp


On 2020/05/29 08:50:18, Julian Feinauer  wrote: 
> Hi folks,> 
> 
> 
> 
> this is an old Issue (see 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/PLC4X/API+Extension+for+1.0).> 
> 
> What I generally would like to have is a way to communicate with the API / 
> the Driver without needing a Connection to e.g. „talk“ about the address 
> input and probably also the connection parameters.> 
> 
> 
> 
> To give you an example, consider I want to have a mask where users could 
> enter their url and address.> 
> 
> It would be nice to get all available protocols> 
> 
> 
> 
> Map map = driverManager.getAllRegisteredProtocols()> 
> 
> 
> 
> to show it in a drop down.> 
> 
> When user selects one I could generate a form to enter all connection 
> parameters> 
> 
> 
> 
> driver.getConnectionParameters();> 
> 
> 
> 
> And then, when he wants to enter a Field Address I could go on like that and 
> could do many things already with the Driver without hte need to have a 
> Conneciton in Place already. Like:> 
> 
> 
> 
> driver.validate(„%DB.asdf“) <-- fails> 
> 
> driver.getValidatingRegex() <-- Could be used in my forms> 
> 
> 
> 
> or even get more detailed information, like an abstract address specification 
> that I could use to build a form.> 
> 
> For S7 this could for example be> 
> 
> 
> 
> List driver.getAddressParts()> 
> 
> 
> 
> which could be something like> 
> 
> 
> 
> MemoryPart <- Enum-Like „DB, Q, I, ...“ and so on.> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tob e clear: I ONLY want to extend the current API and not change anything 
> setup. So all APIs would stay in Place as is but this would help people who 
> allow their users to input PLC4X Informations like we do or e.g. Streampipes 
> (thus, added as CC here).> 
> 
> 
> 
> WDYT?> 
> 
> 
> 
> Julian> 
> 
>