-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 371
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Expected way to include functionality to objects #638
Comments
In my opinion it depends. |
So, your proposal is to create a new object_firmware.c file that implements the necessary functionality and to leave the existing file as is. That's a possible approach but will lead to a situation where nobody contributes platform-specific code to Wakaama, which makes Wakaama usable only for educational purposes rather than something that can be used for actual deployments. There are projects that follow a different approach. For example, the Mcuboot project implements a bootloader and it can be run on existing hardware while at the same time offering an abstract level that remains unchanged from the hardware. The consequence is that you can actually run it on hardware and if you need to port it to an unsupported hardware platform you can use the existing code as a reference. |
I agree with you. But at the current state of the project there is no useable abstraction (except networking). And as the development of wakaama is inactive again I wouldnt expect that this will change in the near future. |
Imaging the following use case: I would like to use Wakaama to perform a firmware update and thereby use the firmware update object. The Wakaama client contains the object_firmware.c but there is no code that actually does the firmware update.
What is the expected way to add this necessary code?
Would I write it directly into object_firmware.c (which would be easy)? If so, re-usability becomes a challenge.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: