Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
Well crunch currently is plain Java and I doubt there are any plans to let this to other languages. Inside plc4x we do have a part plc4j so that would sort of fit. But I would also go for a 4x name with a 4j sub module. However we currently have some utils in plc4x which also will not have ports to other languages (scraper and integration modules). It would be good if we would then move them to the other repo. However then analyse wouldn't für very well anymore as these tools don't analyze. And I have to admit that I still favor "compute" and especially "process" over the other options. Chris Holen Sie sich Outlook für Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> From: Kai Wähner Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2019 7:32:50 PM To: dev@plc4x.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different 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 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 > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 4:49:32 AM > To: 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 > 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" : > > 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
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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 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 > Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 4:49:32 AM > To: 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 > 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" : > > 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 agre
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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 Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2019 4:49:32 AM To: 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 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" : 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 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. > >
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 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" : 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 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 Strlji
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" :
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
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-stut
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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 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 > 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 > Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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" :
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" :
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"
:
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"
:
+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
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
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM
To: 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" :
I would vote for something like Niclas proposed. Much
clearer than
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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" :
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" :
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"
:
+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
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
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM
To: 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" :
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 <
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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" :
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"
:
+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
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
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM
To: 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" :
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" :
>
> peanut gallery; I would recommend a descriptive name, in
format o
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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"
:
+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
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
Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM
To: 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" :
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" :
>
> 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
>
>
>
AW: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
+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 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 Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM To: 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" : 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" : > > 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 > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
Or "PLC4X compute"... That one I forgot, but found again ;-) Chris Holen Sie sich Outlook für Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> From: Christofer Dutz Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 11:09:11 AM To: dev@plc4x.apache.org Subject: 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 Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM To: 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" : 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" : > > 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 > > >
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 Sent: Sunday, September 15, 2019 9:43:13 AM To: 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" : 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" : > > 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 > > >
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" : 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" : > > 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 > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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" : > > 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 > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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" : 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 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
Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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 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
[DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different
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
