Re: Updated dataflow semantics for RTT

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 10:51 PM, Sylvain Joyeux <[email protected]> wrote:
> Just to clarify one thing: it was definitely not my intent to "throw
> Johannes and/or Peter under the bus". My apologies to both of them if that
> is how it looked like.

Apologies are certainly not accepted :-) We were worried that we would
gather too little feedback due to the complex nature of this proposal.
This discussion is really contributing and improving/changing our
proposals for the better, so it feels more like "on the bus" (one with
a piece symbol painted on it :-) ).

We really didn't understand Sylvain's/Rock's usecase and thought that
the current default was broken *for everyone*. Now that we see it
isn't, we of course keep them, in order to stay away from this
scenario: https://i.imgflip.com/rl3g1.jpg

Now that we're top-posting anyway: I believe Johannes' long email
needs some extra drawings to clarify the new, backwards compatible,
connpolicy we have, so that is yet to come in the design document.

Also, all items under Johannes' point "3" apply only on the 'new'
shared connections, not on the traditional connections (ie,
traditional connections don't look up name_id to re-use connection
objects).

Finally, these past weeks, the dataflow has gotten the best review it
got in years, that alone adds majorly to the overall health of the
project. We should indeed not un-do that by breaking things...

Peter
-- 
Orocos-Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.mech.kuleuven.be/mailman/listinfo/orocos-dev