SPIKE - generalised device identifiers (NOT FOR MERGING) #403
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This was an attempt to generalise the way we identify devices (by mac address) in order to easily incorporate other identification schemes (Such as meshtastic IDs). It's probably an abstraction too far for our current purposes (allowing meshtastic devices specifically to ingest data to the platform), but am keeping here for discussion on potential future improvements.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I think we should defer this to think properly about after the meshtastic hackday, but wanted to keep this partial implementation around for discussion:
I'm thinking about a way of generalising "device identifiers" into their own model, so we have a simple, consistent method for identifying devices by mac address, device key, meshtastic id, or any other identification scheme that might come along in future.
For the hackday, i think this is overkill, as it's a bit more subtle to implement than i thought, and a new "meshtastic_id" column is probably a safer option, but it might be nice to revisit this as a later refactoring.