On Dec 16, 2007 10:05 PM, Chad Metcalf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 16, 2007 12:34 PM, Kevin Klues <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > My solution to all this would be to try and convince everyone to switch
> over to tinyos-2.x, but I realize that some people are reluctant to do so
> right away.  Many of the crossbow sensor drivers only exist for tinyos-1.x,
> and many users have written code for their own applications that relies on
> the way the 1.x task scheduler operates (which is quite different than the
> 2.x task scheduler).  Code between the two versions is therefore
> unfortunately not backwards compatible.  So whats the right answer here?
 Do
> we need someone who is really invested in tinyos-1.x to step up and become
> the official maintainer of the tinyos-1.x tree -- fixing bugs, etc. as
they
> come in and pushing out new releases that have the bug fixes in them?  Or
> would it be better to start motivating people to start porting everything
> over to tinyos-2.x, so that their reliance on 1.x slowly fades away?
> >
> I'd imagine this is something the Alliance and probably Core should make a
> decision on. I imagine the "right" answer is to sunset official support
for
> 1.x (toolchains, install, everything). At this point the amount of support
> for 1.x is just a band-aid anyway. Rip it off and be done with it. A brief
> sunset period allows people to transition away or create some community
> support for a 1.2 project. Then after the sunset, its time to move on.
>

The Core position on this is quite clear, and has not changed significantly
from the time the 2.x effort has been presented to the community at the
TTX2. Breaking backwards compatibility was a conscious decision. The fact
that the 1.2 WG did not get far was due to a combination of factors like the
lack of interest in academia for working on the stale 1.x core,  the stealth
use of 1.x in industry, staff problems, the development of Boomerang...

The work of the Core and the Alliance is clearly concentrated on 2.x, and
this is the recommended version for anyone that is joining the community.
That being said, we can not ignore the fact that there are many users out
there that still use tinyos-1.x. So even though the current WGs can not
spend effort in bugfixes, maintaining the tool-chain, etc., the repository
for 1.x will remain open for anyone that wants to contribute code against
it. If there are enough interested parties that will come forward and
resurrect the 1.2 WG, the Core can definitely reach out and provide some
guidance, but not much more, without endangering its primary goal of making
the best possible design decisions for the 2.x core.

Vlado
_______________________________________________
Tinyos-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help

Reply via email to