Nice!
But why is this info living outside the IOTivity documentation?
e.g. how can one know these kind of things?
Hence can we have at least links from IOTivity to this documentation and then
an set of repos that will act as
The whole idea that I have is that this code is useful but not necessar
My opinion: the presence or absence of APIs should not depend on #defines.
For example, I would consider any APIs whose presence, absence, or signature is
affected by
#ifdef __WITH_TLS__
to be a bug that needs to be fixed.
-Original Message-
From: Mats Wichmann [mailto:m...@wichmann.us]
On 02/22/2018 12:15 PM, Dave Thaler wrote:
>
> The API can evolve, just like OCF specs, evolve so there's no fixed
> definition per se.
Of course it's not fixed over time, but for any given release there
should be a well-known API. Then the next release there will be another
well known API, such
My views, as the iotivity API maintainer, below...
-Original Message-
From: iotivity-dev-boun...@lists.iotivity.org
[mailto:iotivity-dev-boun...@lists.iotivity.org] On Behalf Of Wouter van der
Beek (wovander)
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2018 9:49 AM
To: Nash, George ; Mats Wichmann ;
On 02/22/18 16:19, Wouter van der Beek (wovander) wrote:
Hi All,
Hi Wouter !
Related to this, I am will be working on application level code, e.g.
using the IOTivity API.
I like to contribute this code to IOTivity or other open source project.
of course you can create your own repo
I w
Sure..
1) clear definition of the IOTivity API.
2) definition of what is base functionality (e.g. what should be in the stack)
- guidance to developers of code for OCF CR's if that needs to be under
the API (read: new api) or below the API
- starting point:
- all s
Could you please add some clarification what you are actually asking from the
iotivity-dev community. I have read this email chain multiple times and I am
still confused about what exactly you are asking.
George Nash
-Original Message-
From: iotivity-dev-boun...@lists.iotivity.org
[mai
Thx,
Maybe we should clean up the API as an side effect of this request..
e.g. make sure that if someone uses a lower layer that is not intended as API,
it should not link..
Kind Regards,
Wouter
-Original Message-
From: Mats Wichmann [mailto:m...@wichmann.us]
Sent: 22 February 2018 1
On 02/22/2018 08:19 AM, Wouter van der Beek (wovander) wrote:
I'm maybe the wrong person to respond here, but let me have a go.
> Hi All,
>
>>From IOTivity perspective I like to know if code is being developed for an CR
>>if it needs to go below the API or should be regarded as application lev
Hi All,
>From IOTivity perspective I like to know if code is being developed for an CR
>if it needs to go below the API or should be regarded as application level.
For some things it is pretty obvious but for larger infrastructure items it is
probably not.
Is there any guidance from IOTIvity per
10 matches
Mail list logo
