I am OpenHab (OH) 2 user and I I must say that whole PDE thing is redundant 
from my Karaf (as a platform) point of view. But this all comes from past of 
project which was launched with Tycho and PDE since early days. There are 
multiple entities involved in project and it is not an easy task to redefine 
how things should be built.

Initial apis of OH were quite simple and didn’t require anything strictly 
related to physical thing. Starting form OH2 and extraction of Eclipse 
SmartHome there is a seperation of concerns. OH2 bindings define Bridge and 
Things connected over it and may have Channels associated with every of these. 
At this stage it is lowest common denominator. There is no higher level APIs 
for representing pumps, boilers or sensors or alarms but from other hand OH is 
not a SCADA platform. Maybe at some point there will be further generalization 
of code which will allow bindings to gain some benefits? Many of bindings is 
pure software integration with vendor bridges having very little or no hardware 
involved at all which makes it easier to develop.

I haven’t played with Kura so far because I didn’t need such low level library, 
but even if I would need something such that I would rather go for dedicated 
library handling specific use case instead of Kura which brings too much. 

Kind regards,
Lukasz
--
Apache Karaf Committer & PMC
Twitter: @ldywicki
Blog: http://dywicki.pl
Code-House - http://code-house.org


> Wiadomość napisana przez [email protected] w dniu 2 sty 2017, o godz. 
> 19:56:
> 
> I share most of Brad's concerns; at first I was very interested in OpenHAB
> but after playing with it for a bit I began to think about designing a new
> service layer and then seeing if I could fit the OpenHAB native libraries
> to it.
> 
> OpenHAB corroborates my "PDE considered harmful" theory; it must be
> possible to use OSGi idioms effectively while developing in Eclipse PDE,
> but it doesn't seem to happen in practice.
> 
> So Brad, I am right with you and I would like to help - but I am seriously
> short of time at the moment :-(
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to