Meeting 18th May 2015 12:00-14:00

[swatts]

I think we need to start firming the agenda up Peter. I'll get confirmations (I think everyone is interested in a 3rd hour).

I for one vote you in

[Swinders]

the 20th... Did I miss something?

[swatts]

Nope still the 18th AFAIK, has the reminder gone out yet?

I'm going to need some confirmations Ladies and Gentleman for presentations and attendees please.

It will be from 12:00 until 15:00 officially.

[GregPayne]

I've received the reminder and it's the 18th.

I'm hoping to be there so am happy to do a quick chat on ssh if anyone is still interested.

I'm also keen in the extra hour.

[PNHorn]

Doh! My bad. I'm going up to Cambridge for CLUG on the 20th.

[CRoebuck]

Steve,

I'm confirming I will be there on the 18th and think the 3rd hour is a great idea.

As for the framework discussion that has been banded around recently how about the following content;

(James, perhaps we could co-contribute or at least align the comparisons)

NI QMH Refresher (Pro's and Cons)

JKI State Machine Refresher

Then we each in turn explain why we based our own frameworks on the one of the above and why (plus what we did to improve them)

I think the key here is explaining that they are different solutions to potentially different problems and that each should be assesed for it's suitability for the problem at hand (Steve will love that bit)

It's like I said in my CLA Summit presentation, sometimes the 3 VI solution is ok......

I'm also happy to change the content if there's specific content people want to hear about (or not)

[swatts]

I'll group it together under the title framework discussion and here's what I meant by COSTEC as a framework assessment criteria (perhaps we can also discuss this)

Compatability with other languages and technologies

Overhead (prgrammatic and from a developer point of view)

Supportability (by others AND NI)

Type safety / Dataflow safety

Ease of use

Cross platform

I love acronyms! I also like the term unobtrusive as a desirable criteria for a framework, meaning I don't want the framework to mask the solution.

[drjdpowell]

I’ll be there on the 18th.   Though I’m likely to make the case that the NI QMH and the JKI are two solutions to the same problem and the NI solution is flawed.

[CRoebuck]

In the interests of fair and open discussion, I'd argue both are flawed.

It should make for good discussion that's for sure.

[Jpina]

Hi,

I've been a bit disconnected lately as I moved to Cambridge, I am presenting in the CLUG 2 days after this meeting, I don't think I will be able to ask for 2 days off straight after I started here. Will the meeting be accessible via hangouts again?

Jarobit