Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
As per our discussion, it should not be mandatory to be at address 0 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I am not sure if this should be a MUST or a SHOULD.
In theory, a MUST is the best option, it gives consistency across hubs.
In practice, if we make hardware that supports old ONIX1 hubs (e.g. hs64), we need to either ignore this part of the spec or somehow inject the device.
I also said that the heartbeat must always be address 0. I believe this helps with consistency, but we could remove it and leave the specific address to the implementation.
@jonnew what do you think?