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

Update SOME/IP specification to uProtocol 1.5.x #93

Open
stevenhartley opened this issue Mar 19, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #165
Open

Update SOME/IP specification to uProtocol 1.5.x #93

stevenhartley opened this issue Mar 19, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #165
Assignees
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation

Comments

@stevenhartley
Copy link
Contributor

The current SOME/IP specification did not take into consideration the uPClient library concept and ideas in that the translation to/from uMessages to SOME/IP messages will be done inside of the up-client-someip-xxx library under uTransport implementation. the spec requires some cleanup and clarification to align with latest architecture and concepts.

@stevenhartley stevenhartley added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Mar 19, 2024
@stevenhartley stevenhartley self-assigned this Mar 19, 2024
@stevenhartley stevenhartley added this to the v1.0.0-alpha.1 milestone Apr 3, 2024
stevenhartley added a commit that referenced this issue Apr 18, 2024
The following change is a reboot of the SOME/IP specifications in an attempt to drastically simplify to show how we map up-l1 messages to SOME/IP messages and uSubscription messages to SOME/IP-SD messages.  the older specifications had a lot of uProtocol version 1.3.6 concepts (cloudevents) that were rather complicating the situation.

#93
@int0x27 int0x27 linked a pull request May 27, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant