Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Specs to be merged with CS_Hardware #7

Closed
RELNO opened this issue Apr 13, 2018 · 15 comments
Closed

Specs to be merged with CS_Hardware #7

RELNO opened this issue Apr 13, 2018 · 15 comments
Assignees
Labels
duplicate This issue or pull request already exists

Comments

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator

RELNO commented Apr 13, 2018

Thanks for adding this -- https://github.com/CityScope/cityscope.github.io/wiki/Specification-for-CityScope-system
should be merged and renamed into https://github.com/CityScope/CS_Hardware to avoid duplication.
CS_DEPLOY for naming?

@RELNO RELNO added the duplicate This issue or pull request already exists label Apr 13, 2018
@yasushisakai
Copy link
Contributor

yasushisakai commented Apr 14, 2018

Does this

CS_DEPLOY for naming?

mean changing the repo's name to CS_Hardware?

I've thought of this, but Hardware (which currently is (one kind of) table) deserves to focus on hardware. Like setting up the camera the right way, recommended LED panels for efficient lighting, different alternatives for the table (dominant wood version), methods in projector mounting(how many degrees of freedom is preferable),,, so forth. Where deploy is another layer more like an integration of hardware and software.

(I think CSL is kind of this, although we are seeing less adoption of this concept.)
The reasoning behind having the specification in this repo, is

  1. Meta layer than CS repo's.
  2. Positioned like the class definition of CSL repos, (CSL's are instances)
  3. One stop introduction for the whole system

We can raise the hierarchy of the CS_Hardware repo, having a trade off for visiting two repo's to get along. what do you think?

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RELNO commented Apr 14, 2018

mean changing the repo's name to CS_Hardware?

The other way around: We can make CS_Hardware a one-stop-shop for deployment/setup/spec details. [eg CS_DEPLOY / CS_BUILD or any other exciting name..]
Simplicity is key here, the main reason we're having this conv. is because one could not find a 'one place' for all things 'deploy'.

I don't think we should have cityscope.github.io repo mixed with this -- to me, this is a general, high level and sort-of an internal administrative repo. CS_DEPLOY should be faced out to the world.

I also agree that CSL concept is kinda lost, but might evolve when more 'unofficial' collabs will join. CSL is more site/context specific, so I'd keep a generic CS_DEPLOY repo for the most generic form of deployment, and CSL's for specific cases.

@agrignard
Copy link
Collaborator

agrignard commented Apr 15, 2018

my 20 Cents, I think it's not that bad in the wiki of cityscope.github.io which is the kind of global entry point no?
Then what kind of code would we put in CS_Deploy? It looks like it's only documentation?

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RELNO commented Apr 15, 2018

@agrignard if so I'd merge CS_HARDWARE into here.
Although, if we want to be 'really open' to the world, a clean [eg - no code] repo that is only dedicate to 'Deploy' stuff is a bit less intimidating.
In both cases, we should have only one entry point.

@agrignard
Copy link
Collaborator

agrignard commented Apr 15, 2018

Well a repo with no code is basically a wiki no?

The repo would be needed for what? cad files for instances?

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RELNO commented Apr 15, 2018

@agrignard take a look into CS_HARDWARE; it's not code, but manuals that cannot be on wiki [cad/cam files]. cityscope.github.io repo has stuff that would not be cloned/foked if you only build a simple table.

@agrignard
Copy link
Collaborator

Yes that s what I saw, there is some pdf and some Cad... not really code but why not.

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RELNO commented Apr 15, 2018

we can always have an SDK page on the ML site ;)

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RELNO commented Apr 15, 2018

@yasushisakai @agrignard If there are no objections I'm merging Hardware into cityscope.github.io

@yasushisakai
Copy link
Contributor

If it is going to be binary,
why not in the this repo's wiki's repo?
https://github.com/CityScope/cityscope.github.io.wiki.git

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RELNO commented Apr 15, 2018

@yasushisakai Can this hold dxf or pdf? Also, how easy it is to point someone to this as a starting point?

@yasushisakai
Copy link
Contributor

yasushisakai commented Apr 17, 2018 via email

@RELNO
Copy link
Collaborator Author

RELNO commented Apr 17, 2018

Done -- see new readme + hardware
@yasushisakai @agrignard @popabczhang @LAAP @doorleyr - please contribute to this wiki as a one stop shop for deployment. Thanks

@RELNO RELNO closed this as completed Apr 17, 2018
@agrignard
Copy link
Collaborator

I just fix a broken link in the wiki as the repo doesn't exist anymore.
https://github.com/CityScope/cityscope.github.io/wiki/Specification-for-CityScope-system#hardware

Maybe the wiki need some refactoring according to this new modification?

@yasushisakai
Copy link
Contributor

closing

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants