Jump to content


Photo

When will this be released?


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 jonmcbee

jonmcbee
  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 01 April 2015 - 07:26 PM

After seeing the presentation at the CLA summit I am looking forward to getting my hands on the code.  Any idea when this code will be released?


  • 1

#2 jonmcbee

jonmcbee
  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 02 April 2015 - 02:12 PM

Never mind, answered my own question...


  • 0

#3 Jim Kring

Jim Kring
  • JKI Team
  • 1,267 posts

Posted 02 April 2015 - 05:38 PM

After seeing the presentation at the CLA summit I am looking forward to getting my hands on the code.  Any idea when this code will be released?

 

Hi Jon,

 

Thanks for following up. What's on GitHub right now is partial -- we are working to clean up some more stuff and get it released. It's taken a little bit longer than we thought, because of some other administrative and technical stuff we've had to take care of, but I think we've got that worked out. Now, we're ready to start including a lot more people in the discussion and enable community contribution.

 

I'm prepping for the CLA Summit in Rome, the week after next, and getting this next release pushed out is a big part of that.

 

-Jim


  • 0

#4 jonmcbee

jonmcbee
  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 08 April 2015 - 06:47 PM

Hey Jim,

 

I appreciate the update.  I am glad to hear it is a partial release because as I dug into it I started to realize that there was no way to configure the processes (at least not that I could see).  I will wait for the next release, I appreciate all the effort JKI has put into this and look forward to contributing.

 

-Jon


  • 0

#5 jonmcbee

jonmcbee
  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 08 April 2015 - 08:17 PM

Out of curiosity, is there anything major missing aside from Utility methods at the parent level for (something like) "AddProcessToRegistry" and (something like) "GetProcessRendezvous"?  I was able to get it up and running by adding those two methods, but it is entirely possible that I am missing something major or just flat out misusing the code.

 

I realize that you are going to release something more complete soon so feel free to ignore me.  I'm just doing prep work for my own understanding.


  • 0

#6 Jim C

Jim C
  • Members
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA, Earth
  • Interests:LabVIEW

Posted 12 April 2015 - 10:53 AM

I'm dying to see more of this.  I bid on a project that may start soon and will use the JKI State Machine, and I'd love to consider State Machine Objects.


  • 0

#7 Jim Kring

Jim Kring
  • JKI Team
  • 1,267 posts

Posted 13 April 2015 - 04:53 PM

Out of curiosity, is there anything major missing aside from Utility methods at the parent level for (something like) "AddProcessToRegistry" and (something like) "GetProcessRendezvous"?  I was able to get it up and running by adding those two methods, but it is entirely possible that I am missing something major or just flat out misusing the code.

 

I realize that you are going to release something more complete soon so feel free to ignore me.  I'm just doing prep work for my own understanding.

 

Yes, were in the process of making some design decisions -- I'm also in Roma for the CLA Summit and am presenting tomorrow...

 

One thing that we're evaluating is the impact of changing the process VI to be Dynamic Dispatch (with the ability to call or override the parent). This changes slightly the mechanics of process registration and synchronization.

 

Additionally, we're working on a full scripting API to allow programmatic creating, editing, and inspection of JKI SMO classes. This aims to enable creating user interface tools that simplify development.

 

We've been doing this experimental development outside of GitHub to avoid a lot of noise. I'd be happy to loop you into what we're working toward and some of the open design questions.


  • 0

#8 Jim Kring

Jim Kring
  • JKI Team
  • 1,267 posts

Posted 13 April 2015 - 04:54 PM

I'm dying to see more of this.  I bid on a project that may start soon and will use the JKI State Machine, and I'd love to consider State Machine Objects.

 

Hi Jim: Depending on how eager you are to play with this, I could get you an early release to test and provide feedback.

 

Jon: Same goes for you.


  • 1

#9 jegvilsnakke

jegvilsnakke
  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 15 April 2015 - 08:14 PM

Hi,

 

Could you perhaps release the information from the http://blog.jki.net/...achine-objects/presentation of the project?

 

Thanks either way. Look forward to seeing the full code.


  • 0

#10 Jim C

Jim C
  • Members
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA, Earth
  • Interests:LabVIEW

Posted 17 April 2015 - 08:11 AM

 

Hi Jim: Depending on how eager you are to play with this, I could get you an early release to test and provide feedback.

 

Jon: Same goes for you.

 

Jim,

 

Thank you; I would appreciate that very much.

 

Jim

 

PS - you guys rock!


  • 0

#11 Jim C

Jim C
  • Members
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA, Earth
  • Interests:LabVIEW

Posted 02 June 2015 - 05:44 PM

How is this coming?


  • 0

#12 jonmcbee

jonmcbee
  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 08 June 2015 - 01:24 PM

 

Hi Jim: Depending on how eager you are to play with this, I could get you an early release to test and provide feedback.

 

Jon: Same goes for you.

 

Hi Jim,

 

I would love to take a look at an early release.  Just let me know when it's available.

 

Thanks,

Jon


  • 0

#13 Jim C

Jim C
  • Members
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Carolina, USA, Earth
  • Interests:LabVIEW

Posted 11 August 2015 - 11:14 AM

After seeing half of the NI Week 2015 presentation, I'm more excited to know where I can get at it.  Where?  Thank you.


  • 0

#14 T.L.

T.L.
  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 14 October 2015 - 12:06 PM

Hi Jim, hi anybody at JKI,

 

when do you plan to release this?

The sources on github (link in post #2) are more than 8 month old. Are there newer versions available anywhere?

 

Thanks,

Thomas


  • 0