[OpenTRV-dev] RF protocol
EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN
Wed Mar 20 11:35:33 GMT 2013
Yes, I don't want this to get out of hand, but Jack and I in effect invited these students in a while before much of OpenTRV was even up and running, and their involvement can only be an upside IMHO (one of you is already on the list I think!), and all we need to to do is avoid getting in the way of their thesis. I'm sure that the few of us already in OpenTRV don't have a monopoly on good ideas! B^>
So, the protocol requirements can take suggestions from a wider pool of people and then maybe a smaller cabal (maybe me, Mike, Stuart, Phil, Bruno) could sift the core ideas out? All I'd like is for this to have moved forward in a useful way before the coming winter so that we may be in a position to test whatever protocols we have devised in real life situations.
On 20 Mar 2013, at 11:12, Stuart Poulton wrote:
> On 20/03/13 10:57, Jack Kelly wrote:
>> I'm a computer science PhD student at Imperial (unfortunately this doesn't
>> mean I'm a coding ninja! Far from it!) I'm co-supervising two MSc
>> individual projects on "smart heating controls". These projects will run
>> from early June until early Sept. Both students are excellent. One of the
>> students (Shubhangi) is interested in using machine learning to predict
>> room and house occupancy (to automate heating schedules). The other
>> student, Sokratis, is interested in lower-level stuff and has mentioned
>> that he is really interested in building a general purpose home automation
>> / sensor protocol.
>> Which is a very long-winded way of saying that, if you want to, you should
>> discuss your ideas for a home automation / sensor protocol with Sokratis
>> because this stuff might be right up his street. I'm seeing Sokratis later
>> today so I'll discuss with him and get back to you (unless you're reading
>> this, Sokratis?! In which case feel free to jump in, of course!).
> Ok. Having been involved in the design of a home automation protocol by committee, I'm going to impart the following.
> 1 - It's hard
> 2 - The more people that get involved the harder it gets
> 3 - Even when you think you've nailed it someone says what about......
> 4 - People decide to fork the project.
> and now my current view.
> We've got some good ideas, based around hardware and software.
> Lets get some markers in the sand using existing hardware, and simplistic protocol, then look at improving the software side, at the moment its still in the techy, nerdy, hacker space, we can all flash new firmware.
> Once we're able to show things working and in use, nothing worse than becoming a 'kickstarter' type project that talks but doesnt' deliver.
> KISS is the key, "Keep it simple & small"
> OpenTRV-dev mailing list
> EMAIL ADDRESS HIDDEN
More information about the OpenTRV-dev