some thoughts on SAKC
dclark at pobox.com
Thu Mar 4 02:45:01 EST 2010
On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 1:58 AM, Carlos Camargo <cicamargoba at gmail.com> wrote:
>> (1) http://en.qi-hardware.com/wiki/Swiss_Army_Knife_Card still states
>> "SAKC (Swiss Army Knife Card) is a USB-FPGA expansion board for
>> NanoNotes.", however the person that (I think) is the main developer
>> of it has stated in this thread that it actually is a completely
>> separate device, developed I'm pretty sure by people not affiliated
>> with Qi hardware - if that is correct, then that page should be
>> updated, or removed, or moved to a wiki that is of more general scope.
> You're right SAKC is a different device, but is part of QI hardware
> project. Right now, BEN lack hardware interfaces with the real world
> and can be used as SW development tools. SAKC was originaly thinked as
> NANO extension, but we decide use NANO as hardeare development tool
> for hardware hackers. Right now SAKC share a lot of HW components and
> will use the same development tools used on BEN, but allow create
> applications with real wolrld interaction. NANO is the SW development
> tools and SAKC the HW development tool of this open HW and SW tool.
> You as SW guy can develop and use both platforms.
I think maybe I am confused about the distinction between "qi
hardware" and "qi inside".
My understanding was that "qi hardware" was a corporate entity that
produces a set of products. Simultaneously they are a positive member
of the free software / open hardware community, and have a "qi inside"
campaign that will tag other hardware not produced by them as being in
line with their values.
So when you say "[SAKC] is part of qi hardware project", do you mean
that the SAKC is a product being developed by and that will be
produced by the corporate entity known as "qi hardware" (perhaps also
known as "sharism"?), or that it is a product that you fully expect
will receive the "qi inside" seal of approval at some point in the
>> (2) As a person interested in Qi hardware and their current production
>> model the Ben Nanonote, I'm sort of missing what the point of
>> commonality is that keeps the two projects on the same mailing list,
>> wiki, etc.
> In a near future QI server will host a logt of open HW & SW projects,
> related or not with NANO, the QI philosophy don't force to follow NANO
Sure, but from the point of view of a user if I have a Ben Nanonote
(or future product that uses the same types of software), I don't want
to have to read crap about unrelated projects I don't personally care
at all about on a day to day basis (even if I am happy they exist in
So hosting isn't the issue, lack of separation is; sites that host
multiple projects almost all have a way to only look at / search in
With mailing lists this is very easy, just use separate lists.
For mediawiki it is also pretty easy, you can use separate namespaces
- http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Namespace - or probably less
confusingly just have separate wikis for separate projects with
different top levels (1.example.com, 2.example.com, etc.)
Daniel JB Clark | Free Software Activist | http://pobox.com/~dclark
More information about the discussion