You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@plc4x.apache.org by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> on 2018/09/22 12:52:40 UTC
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Let's just keep this thread for all RC discussions ...
Am 19.09.18, 16:28 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
This is the discussion thread for the corresponding VOTE thread.
Please keep discussions in this thread to simplify the counting of votes.
If you have to vote -1 please mention a brief description on why and then take the details to this thread.
Chris
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2018-09-24, Christofer Dutz wrote:
> Isn't this the file you are looking for?
> https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/plc4x/KEYS
It is, I just didn't see it. My fault.
> Regarding the stuff that's not included and added additionally
> ... it's what the apache release-profile automatically creates, so I
> thought I'd not tweak anything.
I'm not a Maven guy and my remark about missing .gitignore is really
something you can ignore if you've been aware of it anyway.
> What's wrong with the file name?
The name of the tag, not a file.
> plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2
"parent" looks wrong to me. Again this may be due to some tooling
oddness. Once the release passes yu'll copy the tag to some kind of
"official" tag name under rel/ anyway, so the point is somewhat moot.
If you want to do me a favor please include the name of the git tag in
subsequent vote threads :-)
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Hi Stefan,
Isn't this the file you are looking for?
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/incubator/plc4x/KEYS
Regarding the stuff that's not included and added additionally ... it's what the apache release-profile automatically creates, so I thought I'd not tweak anything.
I just inspected the rules here and we're using the source-release.xml assembly per default and this has "useDefaultExcludes" which automatically excludes any VCS related files (Makes sense as the downloaded sources no longer are under version control.
Also the maven-remote-resources-plugin is included per default referencing the apache-jar-resource-bundle which generates the DEPENDENIES file automatically.
So I was thinking as this is all stuff defined in the latest apache parent, which we're required to reference, that I better not tweak this.
What's wrong with the file name?
Chris
Am 24.09.18, 02:26 schrieb "Stefan Bodewig" <bo...@apache.org>:
Hi
a few questions as it's been quite some time since I last vetted an
Incubator release.
* should there be a KEYS file containing Christofer's PGP key
somewhere? I've just downloaded it from the keyservers but have come to
expect a project wide KEYS file.
* do the RELEASE_NOTES require an incubation disclaimer?
* It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com>.
HI,
> * do the RELEASE_NOTES require an incubation disclaimer?
No that should be in DISCLAIMER and on the website, having it there as well wouldn’t hurt but it’s not required.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Ah .. ok ... Think I understand the problem. Currently the driver supports automatically splitting individual requests into multiple PDUs so if you request 10 items each 100bytes, this will get split up. However your use case would require to split up one item into 2 sub-items and to merge them after processing the responses. That's currently not supported at all. But we are planning on supporting that in the future as part of a planned addition to optimize our requests by rewriting what we ask the PLC.
This belongs into the same category that it's more efficient to read a bigger block of multiple bytes instead of multiple smaller blocks.
I/we could try to explicitly handle the splitting of large blocks use case as it's probably way more easy to implement than the final rewrite functionality.
Chris
Am 26.09.18, 09:46 schrieb "Uschold Andreas" <An...@tgw-group.com>:
Hi Chris,
I already attached a tcpdump and a thread dump to PLC4X-58.
The odd thing is that two requests are sent to the plc (S7 315-2). The first one is completly empty (zero items) and the second one is too big.
Andreas
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Christofer Dutz [mailto:christofer.dutz@c-ware.de]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. September 2018 15:17
An: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Betreff: [EXT] Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
And I just had a short look just before the first Keynote at ApacheCon.
Regarding: PLC4X-59 [S7] Reading a UDINT with value 0x00000000 and non positive floating point values does not work The different types in S7 definitely have to be fine-tuned. I checked the UDINT constants in org.apache.plc4x.java.s7.netty.model.types.TransportSize and I noticed that the constants for UDINT and DINT are the same (Which can't be correct) same with SINT and USINT and INT and UINT ... so we will probably need to find out how to distinguish these types. So if anyone has some way to reliably read these values, it would be super helpful to do so and record the communication with WireShark and attach these recordings to the Jira issue. I just didn't have the means to produce such traffic without looking in the sourcecode of WireShart (Which would be an absolute No-Go as it's GPL licensed)
PLC4X-56 [S7] S7Field does not recognize addresses with numElements present
PLC4X-57 [S7] Response for address with numElements contains only first item Will definitely be fixed by Julians proposed ANTLR parser.
PLC4X-58 [S7] Reading more then PDU with one request blocks calling thread indefinitly This is exactly what I have been using and testing so I'm a little surprised. Could you please do a WireShark recording and attach that to the issue?
Chris
Am 26.09.18, 08:16 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <j....@pragmaticminds.de>:
Hey,
I had the exact same discussion with Sebastian on slack (he also suggested 0.2.0).
Because he fixed Modbus and we want to have it releases : )
So I don’t care about the number that much as long as we do it regularly and prepare a 0.2.0 as a "(bug-)fixed" 0.1.0.
Its good that we're all on the same side here.
Julian
Am 26.09.18, 14:12 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
By the way ... Just noticed that I replied to the vote thread ... Should have been here. So please take the discussion here.
Chris
Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen
________________________________
From: Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:50:13 PM
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
>> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
>> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
>> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
> As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
> vote email.
True.
Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
should be named like this.
Stefan
AW: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Uschold Andreas <An...@tgw-group.com>.
Hi Chris,
I already attached a tcpdump and a thread dump to PLC4X-58.
The odd thing is that two requests are sent to the plc (S7 315-2). The first one is completly empty (zero items) and the second one is too big.
Andreas
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Christofer Dutz [mailto:christofer.dutz@c-ware.de]
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 26. September 2018 15:17
An: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Betreff: [EXT] Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
And I just had a short look just before the first Keynote at ApacheCon.
Regarding: PLC4X-59 [S7] Reading a UDINT with value 0x00000000 and non positive floating point values does not work The different types in S7 definitely have to be fine-tuned. I checked the UDINT constants in org.apache.plc4x.java.s7.netty.model.types.TransportSize and I noticed that the constants for UDINT and DINT are the same (Which can't be correct) same with SINT and USINT and INT and UINT ... so we will probably need to find out how to distinguish these types. So if anyone has some way to reliably read these values, it would be super helpful to do so and record the communication with WireShark and attach these recordings to the Jira issue. I just didn't have the means to produce such traffic without looking in the sourcecode of WireShart (Which would be an absolute No-Go as it's GPL licensed)
PLC4X-56 [S7] S7Field does not recognize addresses with numElements present
PLC4X-57 [S7] Response for address with numElements contains only first item Will definitely be fixed by Julians proposed ANTLR parser.
PLC4X-58 [S7] Reading more then PDU with one request blocks calling thread indefinitly This is exactly what I have been using and testing so I'm a little surprised. Could you please do a WireShark recording and attach that to the issue?
Chris
Am 26.09.18, 08:16 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <j....@pragmaticminds.de>:
Hey,
I had the exact same discussion with Sebastian on slack (he also suggested 0.2.0).
Because he fixed Modbus and we want to have it releases : )
So I don’t care about the number that much as long as we do it regularly and prepare a 0.2.0 as a "(bug-)fixed" 0.1.0.
Its good that we're all on the same side here.
Julian
Am 26.09.18, 14:12 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
By the way ... Just noticed that I replied to the vote thread ... Should have been here. So please take the discussion here.
Chris
Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen
________________________________
From: Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:50:13 PM
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
>> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
>> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
>> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
> As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
> vote email.
True.
Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
should be named like this.
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Julian Feinauer <j....@pragmaticminds.de>.
Hey andreas, chris,
I recognized that Andreas added a patcht o fix the PLC4X-56 bug and I digged into PLC4X-57 and fixed that.
I will try to provide a PR today or tomorrow for both fixes (based on Andreas patch).
Best
Julian
PS.: I'm unsure about the antlr parser if we have a working parser I think that’s unnecessary as there are more important things to work on.
Am 26.09.18, 15:16 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
And I just had a short look just before the first Keynote at ApacheCon.
Regarding: PLC4X-59 [S7] Reading a UDINT with value 0x00000000 and non positive floating point values does not work
The different types in S7 definitely have to be fine-tuned. I checked the UDINT constants in org.apache.plc4x.java.s7.netty.model.types.TransportSize and I noticed that the constants for UDINT and DINT are the same (Which can't be correct) same with SINT and USINT and INT and UINT ... so we will probably need to find out how to distinguish these types. So if anyone has some way to reliably read these values, it would be super helpful to do so and record the communication with WireShark and attach these recordings to the Jira issue. I just didn't have the means to produce such traffic without looking in the sourcecode of WireShart (Which would be an absolute No-Go as it's GPL licensed)
PLC4X-56 [S7] S7Field does not recognize addresses with numElements present
PLC4X-57 [S7] Response for address with numElements contains only first item
Will definitely be fixed by Julians proposed ANTLR parser.
PLC4X-58 [S7] Reading more then PDU with one request blocks calling thread indefinitly
This is exactly what I have been using and testing so I'm a little surprised. Could you please do a WireShark recording and attach that to the issue?
Chris
Am 26.09.18, 08:16 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <j....@pragmaticminds.de>:
Hey,
I had the exact same discussion with Sebastian on slack (he also suggested 0.2.0).
Because he fixed Modbus and we want to have it releases : )
So I don’t care about the number that much as long as we do it regularly and prepare a 0.2.0 as a "(bug-)fixed" 0.1.0.
Its good that we're all on the same side here.
Julian
Am 26.09.18, 14:12 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
By the way ... Just noticed that I replied to the vote thread ... Should have been here. So please take the discussion here.
Chris
Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen
________________________________
From: Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:50:13 PM
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
>> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
>> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
>> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
> As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
> vote email.
True.
Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
should be named like this.
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
And I just had a short look just before the first Keynote at ApacheCon.
Regarding: PLC4X-59 [S7] Reading a UDINT with value 0x00000000 and non positive floating point values does not work
The different types in S7 definitely have to be fine-tuned. I checked the UDINT constants in org.apache.plc4x.java.s7.netty.model.types.TransportSize and I noticed that the constants for UDINT and DINT are the same (Which can't be correct) same with SINT and USINT and INT and UINT ... so we will probably need to find out how to distinguish these types. So if anyone has some way to reliably read these values, it would be super helpful to do so and record the communication with WireShark and attach these recordings to the Jira issue. I just didn't have the means to produce such traffic without looking in the sourcecode of WireShart (Which would be an absolute No-Go as it's GPL licensed)
PLC4X-56 [S7] S7Field does not recognize addresses with numElements present
PLC4X-57 [S7] Response for address with numElements contains only first item
Will definitely be fixed by Julians proposed ANTLR parser.
PLC4X-58 [S7] Reading more then PDU with one request blocks calling thread indefinitly
This is exactly what I have been using and testing so I'm a little surprised. Could you please do a WireShark recording and attach that to the issue?
Chris
Am 26.09.18, 08:16 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <j....@pragmaticminds.de>:
Hey,
I had the exact same discussion with Sebastian on slack (he also suggested 0.2.0).
Because he fixed Modbus and we want to have it releases : )
So I don’t care about the number that much as long as we do it regularly and prepare a 0.2.0 as a "(bug-)fixed" 0.1.0.
Its good that we're all on the same side here.
Julian
Am 26.09.18, 14:12 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
By the way ... Just noticed that I replied to the vote thread ... Should have been here. So please take the discussion here.
Chris
Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen
________________________________
From: Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:50:13 PM
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
>> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
>> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
>> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
> As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
> vote email.
True.
Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
should be named like this.
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Julian Feinauer <j....@pragmaticminds.de>.
Hey,
I had the exact same discussion with Sebastian on slack (he also suggested 0.2.0).
Because he fixed Modbus and we want to have it releases : )
So I don’t care about the number that much as long as we do it regularly and prepare a 0.2.0 as a "(bug-)fixed" 0.1.0.
Its good that we're all on the same side here.
Julian
Am 26.09.18, 14:12 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
By the way ... Just noticed that I replied to the vote thread ... Should have been here. So please take the discussion here.
Chris
Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen
________________________________
From: Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:50:13 PM
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
>> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
>> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
>> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
> As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
> vote email.
True.
Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
should be named like this.
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
By the way ... Just noticed that I replied to the vote thread ... Should have been here. So please take the discussion here.
Chris
Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen
________________________________
From: Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>
Sent: Monday, September 24, 2018 10:50:13 PM
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
>> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
>> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
>> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
> As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
> vote email.
True.
Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
should be named like this.
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2018-09-24, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
>> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
>> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
>> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
> As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the
> vote email.
True.
Infra protects tags that start with "rel/" that's why the final tag
should be named like this.
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> * It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
> matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
> extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
> this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
As tags change be changed it’s best to include the git hash in the vote email.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
Hi
a few questions as it's been quite some time since I last vetted an
Incubator release.
* should there be a KEYS file containing Christofer's PGP key
somewhere? I've just downloaded it from the keyservers but have come to
expect a project wide KEYS file.
* do the RELEASE_NOTES require an incubation disclaimer?
* It looks as if plc4x-parent-0.1.0-rc2 was the git tag for the RC as it
matches the source zip (which misses the .gitignore but includes an
extra DEPDENDENCIES file, BTW). The name looks a little strange, is
this going to be "fixed" for the final release?
Stefan
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Hi Justin,
thanks for that very thorough check ... I'll remove the MD5 generation from the build and from the documentation.
Regarding the Netty NOTICE ... will look into that asap.
Chris
Am 23.09.18, 16:12 schrieb "Justin Mclean" <ju...@classsoftware.com>:
Hi,
Well strictly speaking it’s only the incubator PMC vote that are binding as you vote on it here first and then the IPMC votes on it. Once you graduate then there’s the PMC votes are binding.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
Well strictly speaking it’s only the incubator PMC vote that are binding as you vote on it here first and then the IPMC votes on it. Once you graduate then there’s the PMC votes are binding.
Thanks,
Justin
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
Hi julian,
first of all ... every vote is valued.
However in general only PMC votes legally count (But we definitely won't ignore non-PMC votes)
It definitely makes sense for non PMCs to check, as more eyes see more.
Chris
Am 22.09.18, 09:01 schrieb "Julian Feinauer" <j....@pragmaticminds.de>:
Hey chris,
one question about the Release process and the voting.
Are only votes from the PMC required or binding or does it also make sense to vote as a contributor?
Julian
Am 22.09.18, 14:52 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
Let's just keep this thread for all RC discussions ...
Am 19.09.18, 16:28 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
This is the discussion thread for the corresponding VOTE thread.
Please keep discussions in this thread to simplify the counting of votes.
If you have to vote -1 please mention a brief description on why and then take the details to this thread.
Chris
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.1.0
Posted by Julian Feinauer <j....@pragmaticminds.de>.
Hey chris,
one question about the Release process and the voting.
Are only votes from the PMC required or binding or does it also make sense to vote as a contributor?
Julian
Am 22.09.18, 14:52 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
Let's just keep this thread for all RC discussions ...
Am 19.09.18, 16:28 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
This is the discussion thread for the corresponding VOTE thread.
Please keep discussions in this thread to simplify the counting of votes.
If you have to vote -1 please mention a brief description on why and then take the details to this thread.
Chris