[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [4diac-dev] Reworking Deployment/Download
|
Hi,
On Mon, 2018-04-30 at 06:53 +0000, Jose Cabral wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think the merge is not a good idea. I think user wouldn't know what
> the "merge" actually does.
I totaly agree here with you and Michael. Maybe if we once get a
graphical merge tool to show differences in versions in 4diac idea we
can rediscuss this.
How about my concerns regarding the overide all?
> Regarding the persistent deployment of application, here's a bug:
>
> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=527628
Ah here it is. I darkly remembered that there was a bug but I couldn't
find it when i wrote my reply. Thanks for puting the link here. So
dicussions regarding that feature could be done with directly this bug.
> Another idea, not sure if it's a step back, is to have applications
> (or maybe devices) in separate files, in order to have a better
> distributed contribution to a system. We had the case when with some
> colleagues we started implementing a system with many devices and
> applications. We assigned one application to each developer, but
> using git wasn't so helpful since all the changes were done on the
> same file, bringing conflicts with every commit.
I think this should be discussed in an own thread. But I really thought
moving the 61499 XML file will improve the situation here as the
changes the individuals may make could be seperated by applications or
subapplications and therefore an auto-merge is possible. Hmhm. The
longer I think I think the problem is mapping. There unorder changes
may occure. A potential solution could be that we sort the mapping area
by applications and subapplications. Then changes would occure in the
same area and git merging should be easier. Do you know where most
conflicts happend?
Cheers,
Alois
>
> Jose Cabral
>
> --
> fortiss
> Forschungsinstitut des Freistaats Bayern für
> softwareintensive Systeme und Services
> Guerickestraße 25
> 80805 München
> Germany
> Tel.: +49 (89) 3603522 529
> Fax: +49 (89) 3603522 50
> E-Mail: cabral@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.fortiss.org/
>
> Amtsgericht München: HRB: 176633
> USt-IdNr.: DE263907002, Steuer-Nr.: 143/237/25900
> Rechtsform: gemeinnützige GmbH
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: München
> Geschäftsführer: Dr. Harald Rueß, Thomas Vallon
> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Dr. Manfred Wolter
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: 4diac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx <4diac-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx> Im
> Auftrag von Michael Golz
> Gesendet: Samstag, 28. April 2018 15:23
> An: alois.zoitl@xxxxxx; 4diac developer discussions <4diac-dev@eclips
> e.org>
> Betreff: Re: [4diac-dev] Reworking Deployment/Download
>
> Hi Alois,
>
> I would delete on override the RES and then load the new (same name).
> Without versioning like Git or filedump you can never match them.
> But the problem will be the re-drawing on the runtime to compare
> something.
> I do not know how to do that with the current state.
>
> My idea would be an xml image on the runtime and this will be
> reloaded after a finished command (like the fboot), this XML Dump can
> maybe merged, but not quite thought out would have considered how to
> manage the memory.
>
>
>
>
> Von meinem iPhone gesendet
>
> > Am 27.04.2018 um 21:12 schrieb Alois Zoitl <alois.zoitl@xxxxxx>:
> >
> > Hi Michael,
> >
> > > On Thu, 2018-04-26 at 17:44 +0200, Michael Golz wrote:
> > > Hi Alois,
> > >
> > > i think override/override all and cancel/cancel all will be
> > > enough.
> > > It may sound good to merge but there can be a lot goes wrong.
> >
> > I was not so sure about the override all. Wouldn't it be dangerouse
> > as
> > I may not remember what resources/devices will be downloaded and
> > then
> > I may kill something I don't want (e.g., running machine). Should
> > there be a second dialog with a list of all resources to be
> > downloaded
> > for configuration on override all?
> >
> > >
> > > I would like to have a function to create and write the fboot in
> > > the
> > > runtime back to the file system, then i can remove my own upload
> > > tool.
> >
> > Sound like a conveniant feature. Even if I don't know how to
> > implement
> > it :-) Could you be so kind and create an issue for that in our
> > bugzilla so that we don't loos it.
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks for the great work!
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > >
> > > Sunny greetings from Egypt
> > > Michael
> >
> > Enjoy the sun,
> > Alois
> >
> > >
> > > Von meinem iPhone gesendet
> > >
> > > > Am 26.04.2018 um 10:38 schrieb Alois Zoitl <alois.zoitl@xxxxxx>
> > > > :
> > > >
> > > > Now with the 1.9.0 release finished I think its time to look
> > > > ahead
> > > > and start pondering about what we would like to have in 1.10.
> > > >
> > > > One part we haven’t spent to much work on in recent releases is
> > > > the
> > > > download process and the deployment console. There I several
> > > > issues
> > > > that should be fixed. With this thread I would like to start
> > > > the
> > > > discussion and planing for potential improvements here.
> > > >
> > > > One thing that I think would make 4diac much easier to use if
> > > > we
> > > > would better handle downloading the same resource several
> > > > times
> > > > (i.e., the infamous “Invalid State”error).
> > > >
> > > > I was thinking that the on the beginning of a download the
> > > > devices
> > > > should be queried on the currently running resources and if
> > > > the
> > > > resource to deploy the user should be asked how to proceed. For
> > > > such
> > > > a dialog I drafted a first mock up with different actions for
> > > > such a
> > > > dialog.
> > > >
> > > > My questions on it are:
> > > > • Is this the right approach?
> > > > • Is there information missing in the dialog's text.
> > > > • Is it clear that “overwrite” means that the currently
> > > > running
> > > > resource will be deleted and the current config will be
> > > > downloaded
> > > > • Is a merge feasible, or would it lead to very complicated
> > > > even
> > > > dangerous situations?
> > > > • Is a cancle and a cancle all needed or only one of both?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In addition to this I also heard from several users that the
> > > > switch
> > > > to the deployment console is very cumbersome and disturbs the
> > > > development flow. Therefore getting rid of it and integrating
> > > > it
> > > > into the system perspective could also be a goal. Here I don’t
> > > > have
> > > > not really an idea how to do this.
> > > >
> > > > Looking forward to your ideas and comments, Alois
> > > > <ResourceQuestionMockUp.png>
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 4diac-dev mailing list
> > > > 4diac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> > > > unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/4diac-dev
> > >
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 4diac-dev mailing list
> > 4diac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> > unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/4diac-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> 4diac-dev mailing list
> 4diac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> unsubscribe from this list, visit https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/lis
> tinfo/4diac-dev
> _______________________________________________
> 4diac-dev mailing list
> 4diac-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/4diac-dev
