Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CANpie


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. I'm a bit taken aback that the only keep votes seem to be from SPAs, but the lack of participation makes it hard to judge, so I can't really see a consensus. Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 17:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

CANpie

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not appear to be notable software; I could only find a single significant hit (in German), which appears to be some kind of blog and thus isn't exactly a reliable source. I couldn't find anything else other than the usual tech question sites and sites that host the code (like GitHub and SourceForge). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:25, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Narutolovehinata5 and I did not find evidence that it is a piece of notable software. Searched article and internet. Knox490 (talk) 14:03, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:27, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. CANpie is a predecessor to SocketCAN, as the maintainer and lead-developer of SocketCAN said himself in his dissertation (German). While SocketCAN is not real-time capable as such, because it depends on the non-real-time Linux kernel scheduler, CANpie is an real-time capable alternative and still actively maintained. CANpie is also used in non-Linux environments like on QNX, Windows, macOS, and bare metal. CANpie presumably will become the defacto standard API for CAN based applications by CAN in Automation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterTS (talk • contribs) 13:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment For classical CAN bus applications and the new CAN FD standard the article references a standard API (like e.g. can4linux or SocketCAN) which is widely used in industrial embedded systems and research facilities. Please refer to the iCC 2017 conference papers. For the same reason (".. anything else other than the usual tech question sites ..") you could mark e.g can4linux for deletion, what definitely makes no sense. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dolores88 (talk • contribs) 16:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment 15 minutes from creation to AfD. Way to go, guys 8-(  Andy Dingley (talk) 17:04, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Perennial proposals. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)


 * List of References Here is a list of references found in the internet:


 * Gateway product
 * A controller board from the beginning of the Maker scene
 * One of the first references in a newsgroup back in 2001
 * Linux Home Automation, CANpie added in 2007
 * Implementation on NXP microcontroller
 * Software Architecture for Modular Self-Reconfigurable Robots, Xerox Palo Alto Research Center
 * Patent for SocketCAN (in German )
 * Diploma theses (Gajdos, English ) (Blumenthal, German )

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: More discussion is needed on the quality of sources to satisfy WP:GNG
 * Keep Additional references have been added to the article which disprove the reason for AFD (Does not appear to be notable software), links to commercial products have not been added. Open for more comments in order to improve the page. Dolores88 (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑Scottywong | gossip _ 00:16, 27 April 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Only keep voices look like SPA users. References here and in the article are too weak to show notability. Sole source close to RS is CVUT diploma thesis (master/Ing. degree I think), but this has only single mention of CANpie. I will look for better sources, but for now, I´m leaning to delete. Pavlor (talk) 05:14, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I browsed all other linked research papers (ICC, other thesis) and again only passing mention (or even no mention at all!). Still no luck in usual online/published technology sources. Pavlor (talk) 05:32, 4 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. CANpie is a notable piece of software in the area of embedded control devices. And don't compare the visibility of it in the media with standard software products for desktop computers. It is the only open source software API I'm aware of for different CAN Bus based protocols. I is different to SocketCAN and can4linux  because the API can be used not only on Linux but especially in deeply embedded devices with or without operating systems. In this sense it is a more generic approach than the others mentioned. Plupp (talk) 09:40, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * To prove notability, you need coverage of the article subject in reliable source (eg. reviews in published/online magazines etc.). No exceptions... Pavlor (talk) 10:22, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * As requested, a list of reliable sources ( published/online magazines)
 * http://www.elektrotechnik.vogel.de/embedded-systeme-zukunftssicher-vernetzen-a-430723/
 * http://www.konstruktionspraxis.vogel.de/can-basismodul-zur-flexiblen-und-kostensparenden-automatisierung-a-431237/
 * https://www.google.de/#q=canpie+site:can-newsletter.org
 * Embedded Design, Nr. 2 / 2014, p. 63 -65
 * Technik+Einkauf, Nr. 1 / 2014, p. 70 -73 Dolores88 (talk) 12:09, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Both vogel.de portals look like RS (first one is short news only, the second is broader). Can´t judge CAN newsletter - I have bad feeling they publish what companies send them. I don´t have access to last two offline sources. Pavlor (talk) 14:55, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Shall I provide a copy of the print media? Any recommended practice? Dolores88 (talk) 16:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Posting copyrighted material is not ideal. Do you know web pages of these magazines, so I can verify their publishing policy? I trust you these articles do exist, I only don´t know, if these magazines are RS by Wikipedia rules. Pavlor (talk) 17:29, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * If these two magazines are http://www.embedded-design.net/ and http://www.technik-einkauf.de/, then most important factor is origin of magazine articles, as both accept texts as paid advertising - only articles written by magazine staff are (probably) RS, which may be hard to find in such magazine. Pavlor (talk) 05:14, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * If have found these links from the impress (http://www.tedo-verlag.de/magazin-embeddeddesign/ and http://www.mi-verlag.de/produkte/fachzeitschriften/technik-einkauf.html), which is pretty much the same what you have. Dolores88 (talk) 07:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.