-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 167
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
Comments
Seems like a good plan to me. |
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. |
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. |
Meeting 8/23
|
This was discussed at AMM. Conclusion seems to be that OBD shall be deprecated, but useful signals (Diagnosis, Oxygen sensors?) added elsewhere. |
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]>
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]>
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]>
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]>
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]>
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]>
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?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: