EPICS Home EPICS Controls Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

Format page
for printing


Search Tech-talk
1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <2010>  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <2010>  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>
Subject: Re: msi again
From: Ralph Lange <[email protected]>
To: Benjamin Franksen <[email protected]>
Cc: EPICS Tech Talk <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 09:25:25 -0400
On 23.08.2010 05:24, Benjamin Franksen wrote:
On Friday, August 20, 2010, Ralph Lange wrote: 
On the MSI move: I am volunteering to move it into dbtools, keeping the
history.
(I have been reluctantly doing too many repository conversions lately,
and this one is actually interesting: it will require merging from an
unrelated repo, which probably makes "swiss army knife" git the best
candidate for the operation. I will create a bzr branch on LP that you
can merge in after 3.14.12 is out.)

The problem with moving msi into base is that it makes it more difficult to
apply site-specific changes. This may not be a strong argument against,
though.

dbLoadTemplate (ioc based) is part of base, the rules for host-side template instantiation are in base, dbLoadTemplate (host based) used to be part of base, and when msi was created as a replacement, I think it was a wrong decision to unbundle it.
The generic functionality of msi (as well as the use cases, and implementing dbLoadTemplate functionality on the host as a "spec") are clear - I think we can provide a reasonable implementation that avoids the need for local patches.

The idea is to keep the MSI variable in the build system (just pointing to the base version as default - instead of relying on a msi binary being in the user's PATH), so using a site-specific version will be just as easy as it is now.

And - last not least: moving msi into base increases the code visibility and makes it easier to improve the shared version (instead of keeping improvements site-specific).

BTW

Please try to avoid moving discussions on tech-talk to private mailing
"lists". If you think it gets too technical, then move the discussion to
core-talk. There are so many advantages to using the public lists, not least
among them that everything gets archived. It is easy to ignore threads that
you are not interested in, but it it is hard if not impossible to follow
something you *are* interested in (even if you do not actively participate
in the discussion) if the stuff is discussed only in a private circle.

No "lists" involved here. In this case core-talk would have been appropriate for following-up, true.

Any ideas how to make phone calls and discussions on the hallway public and archived? ;-)

Cheers,
Ralph

Replies:
Re: msi again Benjamin Franksen
References:
msi again Benjamin Franksen
Re: msi again Benjamin Franksen
Navigate by Date:
Prev: RE: Asyn and I/O intr scanning Mark Rivers
Next: Re: sCalcout - again Pierrick Hanlet
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <2010>  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: msi again Andrew Johnson
Next: Re: msi again Benjamin Franksen
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <2010>  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
ANJ, 02 Sep 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·