Homepage GitHub

Weekly dev call


(Pavel Kirienko) #1

A periodic conference call among the maintainers and developers of the UAVCAN specification is to take place every Wednesday at 18:00 UTC at http://appear.in/Zubax.

Time zone Time
UTC 18:00
Central European Time (CET) 19:00
Central European Summer Time (CEST) 20:00
Eastern European Time (EET) 20:00
Eastern European Summer Time (EEST) 21:00
Pacific Standard Time (PST) 10:00
Pacific Daylight Time (PDT) 11:00
Eastern Standard Time (EST) 13:00
Eastern Daylight Time (EST) 14:00

Please post your feedback and suggestions here.


Virtual plugfest -- looking for testers
(Pavel Kirienko) #2

(Scott Dixon) #3

Point of order, is there a reason we use “appear.in” and not google meetings?


(kjetilkjeka) #4

I missed the meeting today due to Norway changing from daylight saving time this weekend and this unexpectedly “moved” the meeting one hour for me.

If anyone has a notes/minutes from the meeting I would like to see it.

I do have notes from the previous meetings. We should probably find a place to collaborate creating the Agenda and storing notes from meetings for future reference.


(Pavel Kirienko) #5

I expected the DST switch to cause complications. Luckily, a fix is coming. :smiley:

Point of order, is there a reason we use “appear.in” and not google meetings?

No reason other than that appear.in is marginally easier to set up on my computers. I am open to using Google or whatever else is preferred.

If anyone has a notes/minutes from the meeting I would like to see it.

Look out for my posts on this forum and on the pending PR’s on GitHub.


(Scott Dixon) #6

This time it was my turn to miss this due to timezone change. Sorry.

My questions for the call were the following:

  1. where are we with the si namespace? How do we close on this?
  2. The previous si proposal lacked torque. Can we add torque in nm?
  3. Code-compatibility - it’s time to close on this. If my latest proposal isn’t palatable then I’ll go with the BDFL and just accept @pavel.kirienko 's judgement.
  4. I added a counter proposal for transfer priority mnemonics, fyi.
  5. What can I do to close on the v1 standard? I’d really like to get back to work on libuavcan.

(Pavel Kirienko) #7

where are we with the si namespace? How do we close on this?

See my latest comment in the thread: SI namespace design. We could use a competing namespace design proposition to compare against my original one.

The previous si proposal lacked torque. Can we add torque in nm?

By all means.

Code-compatibility - it’s time to close on this. If my latest proposal isn’t palatable then I’ll go with the BDFL

Will reply in the same thread once more tomorrow: The case for code compatibility

What can I do to close on the v1 standard? I’d really like to get back to work on libuavcan.

I think we agree on all things except the versioning issue. The SI namespace does not seem to affect implementations. I think it should be safe for you to start working on the new implementation already, meanwhile I and Kjetil will finish up the spec – Kjetil will take care of the DSDL chapter, whereas I will update the transport layer and the high-level overview sections in the beginning of the document.


Kjetil proposed to move the call to 18:30 UTC. It works well for me during the winter, so I am okay with the change for now; when the DST is active it will get difficult though (18:30 UTC is 21:30 EEST, which is rather late). Perhaps we could pick an earlier time instead, or maybe a different day, to avoid rescheduling the call once again in a few months when the DST is active again. Otherwise, 18:30 UTC works as a tentative solution.


(Pavel Kirienko) #8

Vote on the new time (multiple choice):

  • Mon 17:30 UTC
  • Mon 18:00 UTC
  • Mon 18:30 UTC
  • Tue 17:30 UTC
  • Tue 18:00 UTC
  • Tue 18:30 UTC
  • Wed 17:30 UTC
  • Wed 18:00 UTC
  • Wed 18:30 UTC
  • Thu 17:30 UTC
  • Thu 18:00 UTC
  • Thu 18:30 UTC
  • Fri 17:30 UTC
  • Fri 18:00 UTC
  • Fri 18:30 UTC

0 voters


Weekly dev call - Meeting notes
Weekly dev call - Meeting notes
(kjetilkjeka) #9

I added meeting notes as a topic for now, we will discuss on the meeting tomorow if the layout is fine or should be changed: Weekly dev call - Meeting notes


(Pavel Kirienko) #10

Look at us failing to reach a consensus:

Can we please reconsider the above shown options? @kjetilkjeka any chance to make Tuesday work? @scottdixon how about Wednesday?


(kjetilkjeka) #11

Tuesday before 15:30 UTC or after 19:30 UTC will work fine for me, but I guess that doesn’t match up well with your time zones.

I would also be able to make a Sunday meeting at 17:30 or 18:00 GMT (or any convenient time), but I guess that’s no good for Scott.

Let’s discuss it at the meeting today.


(iain.galloway) #12

Hello @kjetilkjeka @pavel.kirienko @scottdixon - Would there be an opportunity for me to join one of these calls to align on some things NXP is hoping to do?


(Pavel Kirienko) #13

@iain.galloway by all means. The next call is scheduled on Nov 21 18:00 UTC. We didn’t have one today because we just changed the schedule from Mon 18:00 UTC to Wed 18:00 UTC, the previous call was two days ago on Monday.