Meeting Time and Conference information
Meeting Time: 3rd Monday of each month at 1pm EST as needed (if there are no agenda items, the meeting is cancelled)
Zoom Link: https://zoom.us/j/353955907
Meeting ID: 353 955 907
One tap mobile +16699006833,,353955907#
US (San Jose) +16465588656,,353955907#
US (New York) Dial by your location +1 669 900 6833
US (San Jose) +1 646 558 8656
US (New York) 877 369 0926
US Toll-free 855 880 1246
US Toll-free +1 647 558 0588
Canada 855 703 8985
Canada Toll-free Meeting ID: 353 955 907
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/abscayLpz ( https://www.google.com/url?q=https://zoom.us/u/abscayLpz&sa=D&ust=1570487240002000&usg=AOvVaw3baS0YLvMOVQhRUsVMH2C0 )
Aug 20, 2020: Next meeting
July 20, 2020: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
June 30, 2020 (extra meeting to address growing number of issues): Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
Tony's slide deck on commit messages
Jun 15, 2020: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
May 18, 2020: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording (Password: 1k&I$62S)
April 20, 2020: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording (Password: 5W?vM=#X)
Mar 16, 2020 (special long session): Meeting Minutes; Trevor Conn's V2 API issue notes; Meeting Recording
Mar 3, 2020: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording (API V2 special session)
Feb 18, 2020: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
Jan 27, 2020: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
Dec 16: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
Dec 4: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
Nov 18: Meeting Minutes; Meeting Recording
- PR Template for conventional commits is now in place for all repositories for all PRs but without TSC approval. It doesn’t appear to be affecting any problem. We need to finalize the shape of this and officially approve the template by the TSC.
- Mike, Lisa and Tony to provide improved template around conventional commits and any recommended policy for TSC approval. Meeting still forthcoming.
- Mike testing with app services
- 2 different bots (conventional commit bot, Dependa bot – its own thing, not related to conventional commits issue)
- High priority review of ADR for bootstrapping in OCI containers requested.
- Incorporation of Vertical Solution WG adopter presentation feedback
- Jim to collect and present after all 5 presentations
- EdgeX UI - it is for dev/test right now. Would we ever want to have a UI for production? Under what constraints?
- Being worked through Core WG
- How should we apply semantic versioning to modules? When do we update the minor and major versions of modules? (comes from the Hanoi planning meetings)
- Extract of Device Service requirements to ADR legacy - what are all the pieces that need to be moved there?
- Per the Hanoi planning conference - we need to better define "bound checking" so that a design (and eventual implementation) can be brought forth to meet the requirements
- Currently considering limiting the number of operations that can be performed on a service (like a device service) over a period of time or setting the max request size (that lends to DoS attacks)
- Can the solution be more globally applied?
- Design metadata about the “gateway” or host platform (identity, location, …)
- Being worked in core WG
- Need some identifier in Event/Reading
- Need a unique id for each EdgeX instance
- New field “Tags” added to Event/Reading
- Any service could add to that “Tags”
- Optionally – make available a UUID through Metadata
- Is there an industry standard – can we align to any existing standard (Jim to research)
- Tags == Labels
- Not key-value pair
- Should be array of k/v (Maps) or JSON object
- Tag to just to event (not needed to readings)
- ADR to be created after research
- Which issue to tackle this in - TBD
- How do address module and component version release needs for examples (per Slack exchange with Luis Obando). go.mod in the examples helps - or at least some documentation on dependencies.
- How do we review/remove artifact removal (docker images in Docker Hub, snaps, etc.)?
- New Docker policy will remove any image that is not pulled or pushed in 6 months.
- Is order of event/readings being sent by a single device service important? Are there async operations in any service that could change the order of events as they are sent from a DS to core to application services (with REST, 0MQ or MQTT infrastructure)? What do customers desire here? Is maintained order important? What is the current state of the system and can we diagram/document that?
- Jim to do some research first. Findings: there are places in DS, Core and Application Services where messages can get out of order. If order is something that should be an option built in, it will require much work.