<div dir="ltr">In my opinion, it could be righta a table "Firmware" with this fields:<div><br></div><div>Integer "ID"</div><div>String "Operative System" (OperWRT | MicrotiKOS | AirOS)</div>
<div>String "Name" (Stock | Sburratone | Scorreggione)</div><div>Integer "Version"</div><div>Bool "Support IPV6"</div><div>Bool "Support SNMP"</div><div>Bool .... <br>
<div><br></div><div>So into device you can put only the ID reference.</div></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2013/11/6 Stefano De Carlo <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stefanauss@gmail.com" target="_blank">stefanauss@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Il 06/11/2013 14:00, nemesis ha scritto:<br>
<div class="im">><br>
> In the Device table at the moment we have "os" which stands for<br>
> "operating system" and "firmware", both are optional fields.<br>
><br>
> Does it have sense to have both? Or in case of embedded device the OS<br>
> field should be filled with the firmware name?<br>
><br>
> Have your say<br>
<br>
</div>In my experience I think It's best not to have semantic clashes like<br>
this one and just go for an agnostic term. "Operating System" will work<br>
just fine for the whole device spectrum.<br>
<br>
Stefanauss.<br>
<br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Nodeshot mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Nodeshot@ml.ninux.org">Nodeshot@ml.ninux.org</a><br>
<a href="http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/nodeshot" target="_blank">http://ml.ninux.org/mailman/listinfo/nodeshot</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>