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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Architecture: Use of aggregate types (Cameras, Basestations, etc.) is potentially confusing. #11

Open
jeffreydwalter opened this issue Jan 31, 2019 · 0 comments
Open

Architecture: Use of aggregate types (Cameras, Basestations, etc.) is potentially confusing. #11

jeffreydwalter opened this issue Jan 31, 2019 · 0 comments
Labels
help wanted this issue is in need of a friend needs investigation this issue must be better understood before a decision can be made proposal this issue is open to debate

Comments

@jeffreydwalter
Copy link
Owner

@lrstanley I'm open to seeing how your suggestion works out in practice. My main concern here is that I'd prefer to abstract away the need to know what type a device is for the caller. The device object has a deviceType field, but the rules around what qualifies as a basestation are a little fuzzy. For instance, an Arlo Go camera is both a basestation and a camera.
@jeffreydwalter jeffreydwalter added help wanted this issue is in need of a friend good first issue proposal this issue is open to debate needs investigation this issue must be better understood before a decision can be made and removed good first issue labels Jan 31, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
help wanted this issue is in need of a friend needs investigation this issue must be better understood before a decision can be made proposal this issue is open to debate
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@jeffreydwalter