Christoph Stoidner

Hi @hansdaniels, I am interested to understand the reason why you move the executables to '/mnt/data/hmi/tedge/usr/bin/'. That would help to align about a good solution. Can you explain the motivation...

> Apparently, our current software management doesn't add the child device ID to the topic c8y/s/us. However, I come up with a quick solution. (needs to be verified though) >...

@rina23q As decided in sprint planning on 2022-09-14, scope of that issue has changed, from: specification of a "child-device model" to: specification of (1) a "thin-edge domain model" and (2)...

@rina23q As stated in sprint planning on 2022-09-14, rest effort for upcoming spring # 47: 3 SP, sum of 1.5 for "domain model" and 1.5 for "data model".

> So the plan is: > > [...] > > Is this correct? @didier-wenzek, yes, that's correct. Even though my aim for that PR was to have a more convenient...

NOTE: Current known open topics are: 1) _Who_ creates _when_ the child device twin in the cloud. 2) _Who_ declares _when_ the needed supported operations and supported config-types for config...

NOTE: There is also another proposal for child-device support in C8Y Config Plugin, that need to be consided. See https://github.com/thin-edge/thin-edge.io/pull/1195/files#r923112100

> The config management section has for more details now and pretty much aligned with what we've all agreed on so far. But, the child device provisioning flow is still...

> I see that you've dropped the idea to have a `c8y-config-plugin.yml` file per child device in the latest iteration and replaced it with the config types bootstrap message which...

> For me, the most important is the difference of terms that you used. I think it needs to be documented. > > * child device > > * external...