10 Sep
2018
10 Sep
'18
3:48 p.m.
El 10/09/18 a las 14:44, guifipedro escribió:
I tried libremesh but I didn't like. It was very
strange the way new
options are added.
You mean:
* options to the lime config package?
* the module system for adding new features to the system?
* new packages to lime-sdk?
* any other?
When I discussed this problem with some of the
libremesh developers they did not see complexity so it was clearly a
different point of view about the problem.
I discussed with some users and they also find this
problematic.
If you are not the only one having the issue... then the issue must be
raised to the bigger community, not to one dev. I encourage you to share
your point of view of what can be improved over here... or better, send
a pull request :) (you can start by writing an RFC of it!)
Yanosz's work on
https://github.com/yanosz/mesh_testbed_generator/
showed what was missing to build your firmware in an easy manner.
Have you tried chef.libremesh.org ?
the way libremesh deals with having different configs for different
devices is abstracting and detecting the hardware differences, and
ultimately having different configs for different types of devices
within the mesh... not necesary for diferences within the hardware of them.
I was thinking that another approach should work and I
found the opportunity.
Do you have a list of the things that the current system was not
achieving that you were expecting? that would help the conversation :)
The idea is that there are people
responsible of the community firmware decide the design of the network
and the supported devices. What needs to be templated, what not and
what are the parameters for user.
that is basically how lime is working right now.
using firstbootwizard, many of the usecases will be dealt with at boot
time and not at firmware building time (cause that will not exist, as it
will come from factory with librerouter (and possibly many others).
[snip]
The project is new, young and growing. At some point
perhaps I
discover that this template idea is a mess. We will see.
Templating is a good approach when you write the config only at build time.
using uci on the other hand helps be compatible with potential other
configs happen at the same time.
I also feel I am more close to openwrt community.
If that is the purpose, I would definitely try the uci approach, as it
is much closer to the openwrt community!
From the temba point of view: your project (libremesh)
is still very
important because generates important configuration options we use/we
copy.
Libremesh, temba, and other community network firmware, are different
approaches to the same problem.
LibreMesh tries to include us all... that is one of the missions.
Hope you share your inputs.
Regards,