This project has moved. For the latest updates, please go here.

Solutions to the namespace question?

Coordinator
Mar 16, 2012 at 4:15 PM

What we know:

1) GHI did not write this code, so we should not use their name as the manufacturer.

2) We do not have a suitable manufacturer name, since this is an open project created and maintained by individual developers.

3) We should not use the Gadgeteer.Modules namespace for all the code, as the majority of it is not specifically for the Gadgeteer platform.

4) We may even need to change the name of this project to better identify what it contains (not just Gadgeteer code).

So, let's discuss options here.  

(1) & (2) I suggest our "manufacturer" name be something like OpenSource, OpenSourceProject, or similar.

(3) For the core project, something like [Manufacturer Name].XBee.Core would seem more appropriate. Do we need to include a descriptor like NetMf in there? It is self evident to me, but not probably is not to a wider audience.

(4) Let's here some catchy project titles!

 

Developer
Mar 16, 2012 at 7:34 PM

NETMF.OpenSource.XBee.*

Coordinator
Mar 17, 2012 at 9:40 AM

I have created a new branch in which i have renamed the project in a way you suggested. Is this something you are looking for? I think we can use either OpenSource or Community for the manufacturer name. I would leave the Gadgeteer specific library with the GHI namespace as they are the one that will be selling the modules and redistributing the driver. This way they only need to add this small library to the Gadgeteer source and also our core library in some way.

Coordinator
Mar 17, 2012 at 6:03 PM

Thanks for updating the namespaces.  I disagree that we should leave GHI as the manufacturer of the gadgeteer driver.  They didn't write it, and already have a simple serial only driver for their module.  I would suggest leaving the choice up to them about how to build their driver, incorporating our code as they need to.  It could be a simple cut, paste, and namespace change, or they may want to implement it slightly differently.  I will build an OpenSource gadgeteer XBee module driver using their module and check that in, unless I get other feedback here. 

Coordinator
Mar 17, 2012 at 8:16 PM

Ok you are right. Let's not use GHI name at all and let them decide how to use this code. Since you have a Gadgeteer board ransomhall please check if the driver we currently have works. 

So we decide on OpenSource for manufacturer? I was thinking about 'Community' as GHI libraries are also open source.

Coordinator
Mar 19, 2012 at 9:33 AM

I have merged the namespace changed with the default head. Now it's up to you guys (ransomhall?) to make the Gadgeteer driver work. You can create it from scratch if it's easier than modify what GHI created (remember that i added some code to what i took from Gadgeteer repo). I will focus only on the pure NET MF part. Also please anwser my question in prev post. 

Coordinator
Mar 19, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Yes, I've already started working on the Gadgeteer driver.  Let's go with OpenSource for a manufacturer. I'm also pondering the idea of naming the module driver OpenXBee.  I tested the version that Gralin made by installing over the XBee module driver I already had from GHI.  This caused some very weird ambiguity that did not go away even after uninstalling all of it and changing the namespace.  Regardless, using a different name for the module driver will make it less confusing to end users.