Both of those are very good points.
Name: I like what you proposed mozilla-iot-gateway ... The only issue
I have with it is the "mozilla" point. I'm worried that people will
think it's a browser plugin, or something like that. I went to their
webpage [1] and they are calling it "Things Gateway" ... because it is
part of "Project Things". So how about
project-things-gateway or maybe just things-gateway
Supported Stacks: Here's an interesting tidbit. When you install
things-gateway (that's what I'm going to call it in this email) you
really only get the gateway, no supporting stacks.
You can run the gateway, and it will *look* like and act like
everything is installed. You can click on LIFX or TP-Link, and the
web interface will say that they are loaded and all that. But then
you won't be able to see or work with any of those things. You might
think maybe you have a firewall issue, or something like that.
But if you look at your server logs, it's spitting out (over and over
again) errors saying that it can't find those modules.
If you look at the mozilla-iot github area,[2] you'll see all of those
stacks, each in their own github repo. Several aren't even nodejs.
The takeaway is that we need to package each of those things as their
own gateway module, named something like
things-gateway-zigbee
things-gateway-tplink
That is one of the bugs/issues that I want to file with them.
But it looks like version 7.0 is close to being released, so I'm going
to wait until that is released before I file any more bugs.
Troy
[1] -
https://mozilla-iot.github.io/
[2] -
https://github.com/mozilla-iot
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 12:04 AM Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Troy,
>
> I don't have the knowledge about the nodejs side of things but a few
> other notes.
>
> Overall I think we should call the package something more descriptive
> such as mozilla-iot-gateway as gateway could mean a number of things.
>
> In terms of dependencies I suspect we'll likely need some more around
> other deps, and likely some optional supported stacks like openzwave
> and related but that can evolve as we go.
>
> Peter
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 10:09 PM Troy Dawson <tdawson(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jared,
> > Sorry for this taking so long. I finally got some time to work on the
> > gateway rpm. Though really, I need a second opinion to see if I
> > should proceed with what I've done or try something else.
> >
> > As discussed a while ago, I have tried my hand at bundling the gateway
> > nodejs dependencies. The biggest problem with that was there was
> > several binary packages that it wanted. In the end, I bundled
> > everything but those packages, and those packages I created links in
> > the bundle. So the package depends on those binary nodejs packages,
> > but everything else is bundled.
> >
> > I'm attaching my spec file, along with the gateway-tarball.sh that
> > does the bundling.
> >
> > Could you let me know what you think?
> >
> > I'm totally open to being completely wrong. This is the first time
> > I've done a nodejs bundling.
> >
> > Troy
> > p.s. I figured I'd cc the rest of the iot mailling list incase anyone
> > else on here has any ideas.