Hello,

> For what I guess, iotivity (now iotivity-clasic) is not maintained in favor of iotivity-

> lite (old iotivity-constrained).

Well, they are two independent projects, but yes, iotivity-classic has no active

contributors/maintainers. iotivity-lite is being updated and maintained.

> - Device builder have a template to generate code for iotivity-lite. Its currently

> working ?

Yes.

> - The build system have some patches for mbedtls.

Yes, they are required to support some security features of the OCF specifications.

> For what I see aplying them makes the mbedtls api incompatible with upstream, not ?

I think the impact to upstream APIs is minimal. I beleve those patches larglely add new

stuff to the library internals that did not exist on the upstream.

> This patches would be at anypoint integrated into mbebtls original/upstream code?

No, there is no such plan at the moment.

Thanks,

-Kishen.

Hi,

Whats the current iotivity projects status ? For what I guess, iotivity (now iotivity-clasic) is not maintained in favor of iotivity-lite (old iotivity-constrained).

On other way, Im interested in packaging this library(s) for Debian. Currently im packaging ocf specs and device builder. This makes me ask some questions that probably can be resolved here:

- Device builder have a template to generate code for iotivity-lite. Its currently working ?

- The build system have some patches for mbedtls. For what I see aplying them makes the mbedtls api incompatible with upstream, not ? This patches would be at anypoint integrated into mbebtls original/upstream code?

Thanks !