I am also curious how a 4J project complements a 4X project? I only need the Java part (for Kafka), but it also seems confusing to me if a project with a vision of Java, Python and other supporting languages now adds dedicated 4J projects (which the Python developer cannot really use)?
Did you think about this topic? Kai On Thu 19. Sep 2019 at 09:20, Julian Feinauer <j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote: > Although I'm a bit sad that discussion coools down I like Björn s proposal > of something like > > Analyze4j > > Probably traceAnalyzer4j would even be more accurate. And it is already > coupled to plc4x at as subproject. > > Julian > ________________________________ > From: Bjoern Hoeper <hoe...@ltsoft.de> > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 4:49:32 AM > To: dev@plc4x.apache.org <dev@plc4x.apache.org> > Subject: AW: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different > > Hi Everyone, > as Chris already mentioned a logic analyzer is quite a nice tool and in > (loose) analogy to plc4x I would propose something like "Analyze4PLC" Or > "PLCAnalyze4J" it would keep the logic in the naming convention somehow and > make clear what the intention of the framework is. > Just my 50 cents. > Best, > Björn > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Julian Feinauer <j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> > Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. September 2019 00:03 > An: dev@plc4x.apache.org; megachu...@gmail.com > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different > > Hi Kai, > > I understand your point. But I dislike to call things like "process" or > "compute" as these are such overused words. Windows calc does compute, > Mainframes do compute, Hadoop nodes do compute... > > Target audience is PLC4X users so something between IT and OT. And in > fact, as the lib is quite a bit specialiced and think its reasonable to > have people look at the docs first : ) > > But, I mean we are (as Chris pointed out) still in the process of consent > building, so its good to get so many opinions here. > > Julian > > Am 16.09.19, 13:43 schrieb "Kai Wähner" <megachu...@gmail.com>: > > The question is "who should understand what the component does" when he > reads the component name (without any further descriptions)? > > If it is software developers, then they will have no idea what > "osciloscope" means (I don't either). I only understand simple words > like > Connect, Process, Store, etc. :-) > > Even if osciloscope is more accurate, the question is who is the > audience > for potential users of PLC4X and its sub-components. > > Kai > > On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 10:14 AM Christofer Dutz < > christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > wrote: > > > Hi Julian, > > > > A common pattern of modern ASF duels seems to be writing longer and > longer > > emails till someone finally gives up ;-) > > > > Chris > > > > > > Am 16.09.19, 18:51 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" < > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de>: > > > > Hi, > > > > ist not that i disagree with you, I just don’t agree : D > > Logic Analyzer sounds weird for me (but I'm also not so used to > that). > > > > So we should go on discussing.. and if no consensus is found we > meet > > somewhere, two men, nobody else, no guns (and no bears!). Knifes are > > probably okay (have to check the Apache Policy on consensus finding > > again...) : ) > > > > Julian > > > > Am 16.09.19, 09:45 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" < > > christofer.d...@c-ware.de>: > > > > Hi julian, > > > > Well coming back to your explanation: > > I would never use an oszyloscope to analyze such plc signals > they > > have a far to low frequency for oszylloscope analysis. Especially an > > oszylloscope requires things to have a frequency and you couldn't > detect > > simple low frequent logic level shifts. > > Thinking about how I usually analyze signals in the IoT > space, I > > always use my Logic-Analyzer which is much more suited for such > tasks. > > So if we would stick to your reasoning, I would prefer "logic > > analyzer" instead of "oszylloscope". > > > > Chris > > > > > > Am 16.09.19, 17:37 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" < > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de>: > > > > Hi, > > > > although I agree with Chris and Kai (better name things > > functionally) I personally prefer something like 'osciloscope' as it > > transpoets the intent of the lib better than 'process' or 'compute'- > > > > Oscilloscopes are known to help you with analyzing > signals, in > > fact Wikipedia states: > > > > "The waveform can then be analyzed for properties such as > > amplitude, frequency, rise time, time interval, distortion, and > others. > > Modern digital instruments may calculate and display these properties > > directly. Originally, calculation of these values required manually > > measuring the waveform against the scales built into the screen of > the > > instrument.[3]" > > > > So I think this is the name I prefer most, especially > because > > it brings the intent as close as possible. > > > > Julian > > > > > > Am 16.09.19, 02:36 schrieb "Strljic, Matthias Milan" < > > matthias.strl...@isw.uni-stuttgart.de>: > > > > +1 for that. I am not a fan of fancy cool names 😊. > So > > Processing / Filter / SignalWatchDog would be better for me. > > > > Greetings Mathi > > Matthias Strljic, M.Sc. > > > > Universität Stuttgart > > Institut für Steuerungstechnik der Werkzeugmaschinen > und > > Fertigungseinrichtungen (ISW) > > > > Seidenstraße 36 > > 70174 Stuttgart > > GERMANY > > > > Tel: +49 711 685-84530 > > Fax: +49 711 685-74530 > > > > E-Mail: matthias.strl...@isw.uni-stuttgart.de > > Web: http://www.isw.uni-stuttgart.de > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > Gesendet: Sunday, September 15, 2019 7:09 PM > > An: dev@plc4x.apache.org > > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something > different > > > > Hi all, > > > > The thing with Oszilloskope and dsp that I see, ist > that > > für me it sort off relates to hard- and not Software (but that might > just > > be me). > > > > I was discussing this with Julian here at apachecon > and I > > quite like the idea of calling the current layer "PLC4X connect" and > the > > new one "PLC4X process". > > > > Chris > > > > Holen Sie sich Outlook für Android< > https://aka.ms/ghei36> > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Tim Mitsch <t.mit...@pragmaticindustries.de> > > Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM > > To: dev@plc4x.apache.org <dev@plc4x.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something > different > > > > Hey, > > > > As i'm electrical engineer i like the name > oscilloscope. > > But full ack to Kai, name should be clearer. > > Furthermore i like Kai's suggestion PLC4X DSP as it > is > > short and clear what Crunch does ... processing and analyzing > digitalized > > data. Maybe we could also call it PLC4X MSP for 'Mixed Signal > Processing' > > or any other artifical acronym. > > > > Best > > Tim > > > > Am 15.09.19, 18:20 schrieb "Kai Wähner" < > > megachu...@gmail.com>: > > > > I would vote for something like Niclas proposed. > Much > > clearer than having > > yet another product / component name... > > > > For instance, PLC4X DSP, PLC4X Signal Processor, > or > > something what clearly > > describes in one or two words / shortcuts what > the > > component does. > > > > See Kafka and its ecosystem: Kafka Connect, Kafka > > Streams, Confluent Schema > > Registry, Confluent Rest Proxy, Confluent Control > > Center, etc... > > > > Kai > > > > On Sun, Sep 15, 2019 at 9:05 AM Julian Feinauer < > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > I was thinking about naming and came up with > ideas > > like... > > > > > > - trace4j > > > - dsp4j (digital signal processing, that is) > > > - pluse (as we detect pulses and stuff) > > > - oscilloscope <-- I quite like that, it fits > quite > > well as we really look > > > into signals > > > > > > What are thoughts on those? > > > > > > J > > > > > > Am 08.09.19, 22:38 schrieb "Niclas Hedhman" < > > nic...@hedhman.org>: > > > > > > peanut gallery; I would recommend a > descriptive > > name, in format of > > > "PLC4X > > > Abc", rather than a stand-alone name. > Somewhere > > in the future, you may > > > have > > > a dozen of these and one wouldn't know > where to > > start looking. > > > > > > Cheers > > > Niclas > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 4:51 AM Julian > Feinauer < > > > j.feina...@pragmaticminds.de> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I just discussed (off-list) with Justin > the > > next steps needed. > > > > They are > > > > > > > > * fill out software grant (pm) > > > > * Start IP clearance vote on incubator > list > > (JF) > > > > * Gather ICLA from all contributors of > CRUNCH > > > > > > > > Parallel I’d like to start a discuss on > how we > > should call it as > > > PLC4X > > > > subproject. > > > > > > > > Any ideas or suggestions? > > > > > > > > Julian > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer > > > http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy > for Java > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Best regards, Kai Waehner Sent from IPhone
