[introductions]
Magnus Feuer shares news he is leaving JLR for Toyota, Steven Martin will be new lead on RPC from JLR and Magnus intends to stay involved
Ted: if we don't start with a clean
slate but take from JLR repo we should have JLR submit a Member submission
...this makes IPR commitments
clear at the outset
Gunnar: we run GENIVI repositories with clear open source licensing and contributor agreements
GENIVI Vehicle Service Catalog
Gunnar: need to assign maintainers
Ted describes how we use github, conventions, editors and hope to have one from at least each of JLR and Volvo
Steven: I should be able to take over from Magnus as he's leaving JLR as editor on RPC. I will have internal discussions
Jon: I need to get more clarity on what is expected
Magnus: I will support in whatever capacity I can, with Steven initially and then on a more private basis
Ted: Ulf can you try to tell prospective editors what its like without scaring them too much?
Ulf: happy to support any prospective editors, it is quite a bit of fun and you can influence specification with your idea
Ted: a tour of what is in JLR repo at this point?
Magnus: we have some cleanup and potentially additional contributions that should be done beforehand
Steven: there a example service spec yet?
Magnus: in GENIVI repo
... btw should this be a joint GENIVI / W3C meeting
Ted: I am open to that for now, we can split later if it makes sense
Gunnar: I wanted to bring that up
as well, agree initially combined
... as we do for VSS
... we may have these CVII OEM meetings that may influence
this
Magnus: this differ from VSS/Gen2 this RPC etc?
Gunnar: it is our proposed
suggestion but open to input to get industry buy in
... we are trying to bring the discussion to a higher
level
... we are aligning the service catalog yaml with FrancaIDL
Magnus: we will have mechanical
transformation between them
... agree sometimes industry can reject an idea on a minor
details, to the extent you can compartmentalize/componetize the
specs the better
... we have service catalog, tooling and protocol spec
piece
... we discussed but didn't decide what our base should be, eg
JSON_RPC
... advantage would be similarity to Gen2
Ted: encourage people to look into their r&d or products to see if there is rpc-like functionality they may want to propose as there are advantages in having your proposal specifics taken up
Magnus: concern is cost of choice
in terms of computing resources
... is southbound connection in scope down to ECU?
Ted: that belongs more with Autosar
and SomeIP. I have enjoyed our level of abstraction
... we have discussed how we would like to see this go down the
stack into ECUs and there are some conversations around that
Magnus: SomeIP seems to be getting wider adoption indeed
Gunnar: aligns with VSS
strategy
... we certainly should look at that but can work on off-board
communication aspect initially
Magnus: we can leave that in GENIVI's hand for now then
Gunnar: share there may be some hesitation around JSON-RPC but forget the arguments
Magnus: mostly performance but that is minor and it fits better in cloud environment
Gunnar: I am still interested in WAMP
Magnus: we can do a contrast of the two
Ted: next meeting in two weeks - JLR tour and/or RPC protocols
[adjourned]