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

Issue 41 #49

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Issue 41 #49

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

joewxboy
Copy link
Member

added configuration subdirectories for new core and device services, and documentation detailing how to create, test, and publish those new services. This completely separates the Random Integer Device Service from the Edge Foundry Core set of Services.

This PR should address the first half of #41 which is separating the Device Service from the Core.

@joewxboy joewxboy requested a review from dabooz May 17, 2020 22:14
Joseph Pearson added 2 commits May 17, 2020 18:15
Signed-off-by: Joseph Pearson <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Joseph Pearson <[email protected]>

|| Property | Value
| description | EdgeX Foundry service without devices
| sharable | singleton
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we definitely need this service to be singleton? Same comment for the device service def below,

If all goes well and there were no typos, you should see output similar to the following:

```
New dependency created: url: com.github.joewxboy.horizon.edgex.core, org: testorg, version: [1.0.2,INFINITY), arch: amd64 .
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this msg right? I thought this msg only comes out for hzn dev dependency new, which I dont see you doing in these instructions? Maybe you forgot to add instructions for the new dependency.

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
{
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think I understand why you are adding all of these files to source control, but usually when we do that, it's a good idea to provide defaults for this file so that folks can just run the example out of the repo. Can we do that in this case? if not, then the value of source controlling these files is somewhat limited. In that case, maybe only source control the example service def file?

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create Document: 08 Document Modbus Device Addition
2 participants