Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-19 Thread Christofer Dutz
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 plc signals
> they
>

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-19 Thread Kai Wähner
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 agree with Chris and

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-19 Thread Julian Feinauer
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.
>
> Julian
>
>
>  

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-16 Thread Julian Feinauer
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-stuttgart.de
>
> --

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-16 Thread 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-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.or

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-16 Thread Christofer Dutz
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 having
yet another product / component n

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-16 Thread 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 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:

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-16 Thread 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 <
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

Re: [DISCUSS] Rename CRUNCH to something different

2019-09-16 Thread 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 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

2019-09-15 Thread Christofer Dutz
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

2019-09-15 Thread Christofer Dutz
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

2019-09-15 Thread Tim Mitsch
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

2019-09-15 Thread 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

2019-09-15 Thread Julian Feinauer
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

2019-09-08 Thread 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