Hello, Someone from the PMC should try to include the component at least in the components modules folder..
>From there we could guide him to add the component to the kit. -- Andrea Cosentino ---------------------------------- Apache Camel PMC Chair Apache Karaf Committer Apache Servicemix PMC Member Email: ancosen1...@yahoo.com Twitter: @oscerd2 Github: oscerd On Wednesday, October 26, 2022 at 11:04:40 AM GMT+2, Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote: Hi all, So, the vote in the PLC4X Project has passed in favor of moving the PLC4X Camel component here … so what happens now? Chris From: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> Date: Wednesday, 19. October 2022 at 07:42 To: dev@camel.apache.org <dev@camel.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving the Apache PLC4X Camel components into the Apache Camel project? Hi all, So, the Vote is on its way and looking good so far. I’ll keep you posted. Chris From: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> Date: Thursday, 13. October 2022 at 20:29 To: dev@camel.apache.org <dev@camel.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving the Apache PLC4X Camel components into the Apache Camel project? Yeah, It’s a pretty simple component right now. However I think it could become way fancier if we start utilizing some of the new features we just recently added if Karavan supported it … stuff like: Select the “PLC4X Source” … it lists all available drivers … you select one … you either enter the connection details or click on Auto-Discover and get a list of matching targets … you start adding fields you want to read or you click on Browse and get a list of all available tags and their structure and types … you select what you want and off you go. I’d also be happy to help with that stuff as soon as it’s possible. But From: Otavio Rodolfo Piske <angusyo...@gmail.com> Date: Thursday, 13. October 2022 at 08:48 To: dev@camel.apache.org <dev@camel.apache.org> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Moving the Apache PLC4X Camel components into the Apache Camel project? Hello, I also think it would make sense to have this component directly in Camel. >From what I understand, it doesn't seem very big, so it would be rather easy to onboard. Kind regards On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 9:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Hi, > > yes, it makes sense to have such component directly in Camel, easier > to maintain with new Camel changes/updates. > > Regards > JB > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 5:53 PM Andrea Cosentino <anco...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > Moving the component to Camel is more than welcome. > > > > We might help with the migration for sure. > > > > Thanks for reaching out to us. > > > > Il giorno mer 12 ott 2022 alle ore 16:06 Christofer Dutz < > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de> ha scritto: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > after a few chats at last week’s ApacheCon, I would like to start a > > > discussion on moving the Apache PLC4X Camel components into the Apache > > > Camel project. > > > > > > With these components, we are able to read data from industrial > > > programmable logic controllers or other hardware and stream that into > Camel > > > or consume data in Camel and write this information back into the PLCs. > > > > > > We started off building the components in PLC4X, but I think there are > > > several benefits for bringing it to the Camel project such as: > > > > > > * Having the components listed in the official “Camel Store” for > easy > > > setup > > > * Having the components maintained to keep them up to date with > > > changes in Camel > > > > > > I know that on the other side, if we moved the components here, the > Camel > > > project now would need to react to changes in the PLC4X project, but > our > > > Read/Write/Subscribe API has generally been pretty stable and the ones > > > we’re currently fine-tuning (Auto-Discover, Browse) are ones the > components > > > not yet utilize. > > > > > > I’d also be willing to come along and take care of maintaining PLC4X > > > related changes. > > > > > > What do you folks think? We had discussed this in the Apache PLC4X > project > > > before and then it was general consensus, that we’d love to do this. > But I > > > would re-activate that discussion on our list, if there’s interest on > your > > > side. > > > > > > Chris > > > > -- Otavio R. Piske http://orpiske.net
