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

Deprecation and Removal of OBD branch? #635

Open
erikbosch opened this issue Jul 31, 2023 · 6 comments
Open

Deprecation and Removal of OBD branch? #635

erikbosch opened this issue Jul 31, 2023 · 6 comments

Comments

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator

A topic that comes up now and then is removal of the OBD branch. Sometimes the rationale is that COVESA should not care about diagnostics data at all, sometimes that there is no reason to duplicate signals, if we need signals concerning for examples oxygen sensors and trouble codes they should exist in the "normal" tree.

This issue intends to collect feedback on the topic as input for decision. Is there someone that is strongly against removing the OBD branch? If so, why? Could it be mitigated by for example adding new signals in other trees?

To start the discussion - would this be a feasible way forward?

  • In VSS 5.0 we mark the OBD branch as deprecated
  • In VSS 6.0 we remove it.
  • Until VSS 5.0 (or latest at VSS 6.0) everyone that wants/needs information that currently exist only in OBD-branch must create corresponding signals in some other branch.
@ppb2020
Copy link
Collaborator

ppb2020 commented Jul 31, 2023

Seems like a good plan to me.

@nickrbb
Copy link
Contributor

nickrbb commented Aug 1, 2023

I agree, removing duplication of signals is a good idea. I would suggest we make efforts to port all of the signals though, as VSS has a much wider consumer base than it does active contributor base. It would also make VSS a much better alternative to OBD (since it would host a superset of OBD signals).

Furthermore, it might also be a worthwhile effort though to provide a mapping in some form or another (possibly just a readmeOBD.md file) of OBD signals to their VSS equivalents, at least in v6, to help e.g. OBD experts who are also VSS newbies. This could prevent people bringing in contributions later on introducing a specific OBD branch and signal that already exists in VSS but which is not so easy to find/map.

@SebastianSchildt
Copy link
Collaborator

It might make sense, to still provide OBD as an "offical" overlay, as it is still in widespread use, also for simple telemetry applications.

Other than that I'd think that maybe DTC codes should be somehow migrated, as those are really the basis for many "first-shot" diagnostics, but those might be split into the different branches.

@adobekan
Copy link
Collaborator

adobekan commented Aug 8, 2023

It might make sense, to still provide OBD as an "offical" overlay, as it is still in widespread use, also for simple telemetry applications.

Other than that I'd think that maybe DTC codes should be somehow migrated, as those are really the basis for many "first-shot" diagnostics, but those might be split into the different branches.

+1 We should definitely move them to an overlay.

@SebastianSchildt
Copy link
Collaborator

Meeting 8/23

  • "how to deprecate" correctly, so that people can upgrade VSS if they want while still being able to rely on OBD signals if they need them
  • seems "doable" here like Erik lined out above (it is harder when changing metadata such as dataypes/units, but this i not the case here)

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator Author

This was discussed at AMM. Conclusion seems to be that OBD shall be deprecated, but useful signals (Diagnosis, Oxygen sensors?) added elsewhere.

erikbosch added a commit to boschglobal/vehicle_signal_specification that referenced this issue Jan 4, 2024
This is a follow up to COVESA#635
Intention is to have them deprecated and remove them first in VSS 6.0
Until then anyone can create PRs with replacement signals as needed.
This PR contains replacement signals for diagnostics.

Signed-off-by: Erik Jaegervall <[email protected]>
erikbosch added a commit to boschglobal/vehicle_signal_specification that referenced this issue Jan 4, 2024
This is a follow up to COVESA#635
Intention is to have them deprecated and remove them first in VSS 6.0
Until then anyone can create PRs with replacement signals as needed.
This PR contains replacement signals for diagnostics.

Signed-off-by: Erik Jaegervall <[email protected]>
erikbosch added a commit to boschglobal/vehicle_signal_specification that referenced this issue Jan 4, 2024
This is a follow up to COVESA#635
Intention is to have them deprecated and remove them first in VSS 6.0
Until then anyone can create PRs with replacement signals as needed.
This PR contains replacement signals for diagnostics.

Signed-off-by: Erik Jaegervall <[email protected]>
erikbosch added a commit to boschglobal/vehicle_signal_specification that referenced this issue Jan 30, 2024
This is a follow up to COVESA#635
Intention is to have them deprecated and remove them first in VSS 6.0
Until then anyone can create PRs with replacement signals as needed.
This PR contains replacement signals for diagnostics.

Signed-off-by: Erik Jaegervall <[email protected]>
erikbosch added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 13, 2024
This is a follow up to #635
Intention is to have them deprecated and remove them first in VSS 6.0
Until then anyone can create PRs with replacement signals as needed.
This PR contains replacement signals for diagnostics.

Signed-off-by: Erik Jaegervall <[email protected]>
erikbosch added a commit to boschglobal/vehicle_signal_specification that referenced this issue May 6, 2024
This is a follow up to COVESA#635
Intention is to have them deprecated and remove them first in VSS 6.0
Until then anyone can create PRs with replacement signals as needed.
This PR contains replacement signals for diagnostics.

Signed-off-by: Erik Jaegervall <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants