the Code explosion is going to get worse
rjo_
Posts: 1,825
Hi guys!
I was reading localroger's thread.
I seem to be running across an increasing number of slightly varying objects(most of which are in the obex but only as supporting objects). Some of them are really neat but they are getting difficult to keep straight in my brain.
Like localroger, I have been working on PropDos as well. My mods are really minor and I really like the name PropDos...
... So, I was scratching my noodle trying to figure out what to call it. I was thinking of staying with "PropDos" but rather than giving it a version number... which would confuse people... give it a mod number... So: "PropDosV1.7b/M0.1" This conserves the genealogy of the code so that people will understand where it comes from and what it basically is and that this object is basically a mod.
Maybe we need a genealogy thread that shows origins and lists mods? That way when people are looking for this feature or that... they can go to the mod page and see what is listed?
Ideas?
Rich
I was reading localroger's thread.
I seem to be running across an increasing number of slightly varying objects(most of which are in the obex but only as supporting objects). Some of them are really neat but they are getting difficult to keep straight in my brain.
Like localroger, I have been working on PropDos as well. My mods are really minor and I really like the name PropDos...
... So, I was scratching my noodle trying to figure out what to call it. I was thinking of staying with "PropDos" but rather than giving it a version number... which would confuse people... give it a mod number... So: "PropDosV1.7b/M0.1" This conserves the genealogy of the code so that people will understand where it comes from and what it basically is and that this object is basically a mod.
Maybe we need a genealogy thread that shows origins and lists mods? That way when people are looking for this feature or that... they can go to the mod page and see what is listed?
Ideas?
Rich
Comments
In other places and other times, there have been·TOS for Tape Operating System, which I don't think you're writing either -- and many more.· RCA had a TDOS for Tape-Disk-Operating System on the Spectra 70 series of mainframes, which I always thought fitting because that particular OS was indeed tedious to use.
With my classical tastes in language, I would suggest you call it APropOS for A Propeller Operating System.· That's appropriate, wouldn't you say?
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
· -- Carl, nn5i@arrl.net
Post Edited (Carl Hayes) : 3/30/2009 6:25:24 AM GMT
I like it, very clever.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
--Steve
Propalyzer: Propeller PC Logic Analyzer
http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?p=788230
It's a good problem to have. [noparse]:)[/noparse] Some of the best projects have been those which have
been handled by many contributors. (Best example has been AiGeneric.) However,
I agree that it is becoming difficult to track the revisions. (This forum software doesn't help.)
Forum turnover doesn't help either.
I've just started to document some of these on propeller.warrantyvoid.us
The one thing that I think we need to maintain is the release original in OBEX. (When possible)
The other is to make sure we list anyone who contributed to the code in the source
either by full name or forum name so that credit is maintained.
@Others:
Yes, I know DOS isn't a technically correct term for PropDOS. It should have been called PropSDOS. [noparse]:)[/noparse] I took advantage of the fact that most people here are familiar with DOS
and would understand what it was about by it's name.
OBC
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
New to the Propeller?
Visit the: The Propeller Pages @ Warranty Void.
One thought I had was to make the OBEX threaded. Original authors can contribute something, then underneath that we have versions, mods and such. Or, have another sub-forum, with one thread per object. Parallax opens the thread, mods and such go in posts below it.
Or... A few of us regulars just start posting code on the wiki, threading it as the mods / revisions come, while encouraging contributors to do the same.
It is a good problem to have though. No question.
OBC: PropDOS is just great! Been toying with it, and thanks!
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
Propeller Wiki: Share the coolness!
Chat in real time with other Propellerheads on IRC #propeller @ freenode.net
Safety Tip: Life is as good as YOU think it is!
Andy
Perhaps he will review this thread and comment... [noparse]:)[/noparse]
OBC
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
New to the Propeller?
Visit the: The Propeller Pages @ Warranty Void.
Yup,·I like it·[noparse]:)[/noparse]
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
--Steve
Propalyzer: Propeller PC Logic Analyzer
http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?p=788230
I cannot find a copy of the AiGeneric source (!), not even sure what I contributed to the project now, and I'm sure more people did more than I did - but I have no problem with MIT licensing that.
My only real concern was people using the AiChip trademark, or more correctly worried about it being used and giving the impression the work originated from AiChip when it hadn't - Nothing worse than, "your code doesn't work", and finding you didn't write most of it in the first place
I think a tree of OBEX objects is a good idea, especially if it visually shows what grew from what and indicates what was added or removed. Especially as Prop development is a free-for-all and I don't think anyone wants to stifle that.
For things that are inspired by rather than built-upon others, putting all those at the same top level would perhaps make sense, as long as they are under the same grouping.
As to naming, the AiChip_* is a particular case of not wanting variants growing with the same name ( also the case when people release under their own name ), but no reason not to grow a branch from that with a different name - as happened with AiGeneric_* and have a tree there. If anyone wanted to start with AiChip_* they'd see the note saying please don't reuse the AiChip name ( ie, grow a new branch for your new derivative ) whereas with more generic product name they can grown new versions etc, and naming can even change.
Not sure how that would all be managed though.
Basically, anything I've ever produced ( unless it explicitly states otherwise ) can be considered MIT licensed. Give a shout if there's anything which is questionable and I'll probably magically appear again; plenty of puffs of smoke in stock.
@hippy & others.
This is the current somewhat "official" home of AiGeneric.
http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?p=704974
@hippy:
At present everyone has nodded at the idea of placing this as MIT, but we didn't
want to step on any toes. Will the name AiGeneric work as this official name,
or shall we alter it more for the OBEX entry?
OBC
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
New to the Propeller?
Visit the: The Propeller Pages @ Warranty Void.
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
· -- Carl, nn5i@arrl.net
it would be POSR... meaning Propeller OS-- Remote
poser
n. A wannabee; not hacker slang, but used among crackers, phreaks and warez d00dz. Not as negative as lamer or leech. Probably derives from a similar usage among punk-rockers and metalheads, putting down those who "talk the talk but don't walk the walk".
@Rich: You can call it anything you want! You don't have to stick with PropDOS
just because it's a mod. [noparse]:)[/noparse] It we followed that rule, I would have had to call
PropDOS "FemtoOS" [noparse]:)[/noparse] I borrowed heavily from Mike Green's version of Femto,
and what I couldn't find I picked his brain (and others) for solutions.
Thanks Mike!
OBC
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
New to the Propeller?
Visit the: The Propeller Pages @ Warranty Void.
BitTorrent downloads would be nice. Parallax doesn't want to make and distribute disks as they tend to be wasteful as revisions overtake older disks on hand.
If only we could get our hands on the bulk of the material, then some of us with time and intelligence could present a proposal of how to make OBEX well managed. There are a wide variety of version tracking applications already available with GNU licenses and while some are way too much for OBEX, a few are lean and simple.
I have several modified versions of Tim Moore's pcFullDuplexSerial4FC. I'm hesitant to place them in the OBEX because I don't want to look like I'm a major contributor to the software. I'm also hesitant because I have so many different versions (more than posted on the thread).
I would be nice to able to have a way of indicating that the object is a derivative work.
Duane
(I should talk, though, I have never yet left a comment or review!)
The a propeller form of github may be just what you're looking for.
Red
Say someone new *cough* was to ask for help as to where to start in reading a chain of shift registers in pasm.
Being able to hyperlink in a forum post directly into a prettified sourcefile would really help facilitate those kinds of conversations.
https://github.com/redvers/isokeyboard/blob/master/isoasm.spin for example, but prettified.
Pa-DUM-Pum!
Parent Over Shoulder?
http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?128184-Serial-Objects-for-SPIN-Programming
So, if it is based on PropDos a rev or mod number is fine. As long as the source code cantains genealogy and credits, I think it all makes sense. At least with the obex, it will be listed together with other versions. (e.g. my FullDuplexSerial_rr004 is just a simple mod by me. "rr004" is my internal rev number, and a tracability/version/backup habit I have had since the early 70's).
BTW, please don't put off posting to the OBEX if you make a worthwhile addition, no matter how small. Others will use it if it makes sense. Better to have the choice than reinvent the wheel, or worse still fumble around the problem. (note to self - post more code)
Closer to "Piece of 'Stuff' ..."