Re: [m2m-iwg] M2M Top-Level Project

[UOMo <uomo@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ben/all,

One more thing if you look at examples like LocationTech (where you're at least involved as Mentor to some extent) is that similar to PolarSys (which is even more of a cross-cut trying to cover everything from M2M/Embedded to Automotive, Modeling, Location/GIS and other verticals like Healthcare) there are overlaps. STEM once under a top level umbrella that dissolved later (OHF) became a separate Technology project. If you look at both LocationTech and PolarSys their broad scope definition and taglines would theoretically qualify STEM there, too, probably more LocationTech. The only project under the LocationTech umbrella is an RCP tool not so different from STEM but for more general purpose location-based modelling (well, there are several distros, one for Tsunami Prediction and Warning goes in a similar direction as STEM)

Protocols or standards are not found there right now and similar to e.g. MQTT there are standard-defining bodies like OASIS or OGC doing just that. They may interact with top level umbrella projects like LocationTech, while some members of these organizations probably see less value to join by themselves. 

Papyrus is a tool that seems torn between EMF, the (not much more than Science it feels) Automotive IWG and PolarSys. That for some tools or projects is also a risk to keep in mind. Mylyn started as Technology if I remember correctly (still called Mylar) then moved to Tools and eventually became an umbrella. 

There are various ways to categorize them, but even using the existing Eclipse umbrella top-level groups more efficiently instead of keeping it all in Technology could be an option. You referred to Ponte as "fully fledged server", but Quest so far mostly builds on underlying servers like Node.js, so I don't think I'd call it RT. while the description of Minihi "The Mihini project delivers an embedded runtime..." speaks for itself and could place Minihi under the Eclipse RT umbrella, too.

Ponte has some characteristics of stuff that's in WebTools now as well as some projects under the SOA Umbrella. Others like Paho may feel like SOA, too as the focus is on Messaging. While Koneki and other M2M Tooling projects are certainly something that may feel at home under the Tools umbrella and its various branches. No significant activity there for 2-3 years now, but Seqoyah and Mobile Tools Project underneath could be a shelf for M2M related, tools, too. Kepler does not seem to have a "Mobile" distro any more either. There is a fuzzy "Automotive" one that doesn't seem to know, whether it's the "C/C++" distro or "Modeling", nor does it show any clear results of the Automotive IWG as there seems to be little output there yet. Having an Eclipse distro for M2M development partly to take over from the Mobile one could be a good step. Maybe for Juno as it looks  too late this year, 

Werner

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 5:47 PM, <m2m-iwg-request@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Send m2m-iwg mailing list submissions to
        m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 06:25:37 -0700
From: Benjamin Cab? <bcabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: m2m Industry Working Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] M2M Top-Level Project
Message-ID: <CDE4A829.441D9%BCabe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"

Hi Mike, all,

+1, definitely. I think a top-level project would really help to federate M2M projects under a common umbrella.
It would be good to discuss what domains we would like the top-level project to cover. At the moment the M2M IWG charter states that it coordinates the work around tools, frameworks and protocols for M2M ; which is probably a good basis for a top-level project charter. However, I think we should be more clear regarding the fact that some projects are targeting constrained embedded devices (Mihini, Paho clients), and some other target full-fledged servers (e.g. Ponte). Also, the M2M IWG as of today is very much focused on enabling M2M by providing the basic building blocks (device management, communication protocols etc.), while I think there should also be room for technologies that are further down the development chain, especially the ones allowing the development of end-user applications making use of M2M data.

>From a very high-level perspective, I'd like to have a top-level project with a tagline that could be "Connecting". Connecting machines to machines (embedded agents, protocols, brokers, protocol "adapters"?), connecting developers to machines (tools, debuggers, simulators, code generators ?), connecting end-users to machines (SCADA, visual dashboards, ?). What are your thoughts?

Benjamin--