As iotivity moves forward, it would be good to resolve questions on
versions of external projects we link to.

- tinycbor was flipped to 0.5 for master so it's up to date. however,
one respondent on the list (Jason Sun - [email protected]) recently
reported having problems because of 0.5 which went away when dropping to
0.4 - I don't know all the details since I was traveling and not paying
attention. We should make sure that's rooted out.

- we're still using an old internal libcoap.  I fixed the problems with
using the "upstream" (actually another fork, but more recent) libcoap on
Linux, but there were problems on other platforms when I submitted that
to gerrit.  This should not be complicated.  In addition, our forked
"upstream" is not the latest from the upstream project. I know there are
patches we need which did not go in upstream.

- some of the codebase uses our own forked copy of utlist.h, some uses
the one found in libcoap (that is, some files #include "utlist.h" and
others #include <coap/utlist.h>). utlist.h is from another external
project (uthash) so there's a sync challenge here - our forked copy is
much newer than the one in the libcoap we're using and slightly newer
than the "upstream" libcoap we would otherwise use (see previous note).
I recall finding some location in the code that defines a couple of
macros because they're convenient and found in a later upstream version,
but they're actually in our copy (resource/c_common/utlist.h).

- our googletest is on 1.7 (the Sept. 2013 release), while upstream is
on 1.8 (Aug 2016 release).  There may be reasons to stay with 1.7, I
don't know the googletest version impacts on the project.

- mbedtls in our tree is 2.4.2, plus our own patch. Upstream is now on
2.7.1 - there have been three version and three dot releases since the
one we're using.

we're out of date on other things too, the above is not an exhaustive
list.

the point of this message is to think about which uplifts we want and
get them done before something gets into a QA cycle and it becomes more
expensive quantify the impacts of a switch. it's also fine not to sync
to upstreams, but it should be a conscious decision - upstreams continue
evolving with features, bug fixes, and security issue that we should not
just ingore because it looks like what we have is "working OK".  I'd
assume from a security viewpoint it would be particularly important to
pay attention to mbedtls evolution.


-- mats

(note: my email provider made it onto the SORBS list. again. I'm going
to have to pay to make a change as they seem unable to prevent this.
anyway: I changed my iotivity subscription to an unaffected address to
avoid bounces, but this is only supposed to be a temporary change - it's
still me even if you may not recognize the address)
_______________________________________________
iotivity-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev

Reply via email to