Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

On Freitag, 29. Oktober 2010, Ben Franksen wrote:
> this is a poll to determine whether anyone is actually using the
> sequencer with backends other than Channel Access and so needs
> support for the pv layer between the sequencer and the backend data
> transfer protocol.
>
> I would rather like to get rid of the pv layer for several reasons.

The people at KECK have told me they discussed it and have decided they 
no longer need the KTL support, quote: "We're all for simplifying it!"

So, one last time:

If you are using the pv layer for anything (other than as obligatory 
bridge to CA as required by previous sequencer versions), or if you 
think that there are other important reasons to keep it, this is your 
last chance to save it, otherwise it's going to pay its debt to nature.

Cheers
Ben
-- 
"Never confuse what is natural with what is habitual."
                                   -- attributed to Mahatma Gandhi

Replies:

Re: Last chance to save the sequencer's pv layer Andrew Johnson

Re: Last chance to save the sequencer's pv layer Ben Franksen

References:

Attention, poll: Who needs the sequencer's pv layer? Ben Franksen

Navigate by Date:

Prev: RE: EPICS CA problems Mark Rivers

Next: hex format convert to a specified length Damek Yahto

Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <2010>  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 

Navigate by Thread:

Prev: Re: Attention, poll: Who needs the sequencer's pv layer? Benjamin Franksen

Next: Re: Last chance to save the sequencer's pv layer Andrew Johnson

Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <2010>  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024