I've noticed that cvs server is not responding
it seems to be working right now
oh man - I didn't notice tha tseb had committed all the PDF files for every Mesa card
micges: the cvs hosting site had some connectivity problems earlier. it looks like they may be resolved, or at least lessened.
micges: are you still having trouble now?
SWPadnos: ouch -- those should probably not be there
each is <200k, so it's not too bad
but we can't change them, and they're likely copyrighted by Mesa
jepler: its ok now, thanks
micges: good. thanks for mentioning the problem though
Darn same topic on both lists.
SWPadnos, The earlier m5i20 stuff was also mesa copyright but I think PeterW allowed us to gpl it.
I'm just talking about the manuals - there are 6 PDFs in the hal/drivers/mesa-hostmots/docs dir
err - hostmot2
That's right I did see those go by and wondered why they were at that location.
normally we'd have the lyx (or whatever) source, but we can't modify these
Yes we should move them into our usual document process.
well, we can't - we don't hav ethe source :)
and we don't want it I think
unless we want to include the manuals for all supported hardware
I would sure not say "no" if somebody wanted to ask permission permission, and then bundle as much third-party documentation as possible. but I don't think there's much value in putting it alongside the source code. Probably it should be a separate location and when/if it is packaged it should be a separate package.
like emc2-vendor-docs :)
a carefully maintained web page of links would be better
Yep links or a separate package. Links has the advantage of the producer of the stuff keeping it up to date.
that avoids all problems of permission and I think is the simplest way for people to get and read the docs
And since these are unmodified mesa docs I see no need to keep them with our code even though it uses the devices described by them.
If they were unique to us, like the drivers are, then I'd say let's put them in our documents.
I don't see any copyright notice so we could certainly ask to borrow stuff it it helps our documentation of our drivers.
[15:11:25] <skunkworks_> http://www.altera.com/products/devkits/altera/kit-cyc2-2C20N.html
a guy here is getting one as an early christmas present.
(from his brother that does some 'high level shit' (actual quote from him) at mayo clinic)
skunkworks_: fun. looks like that chip can handle designs that are about 10x more complex than the fpga chip on the m5i20
skunkworks_: I dunno if you saw it in the logs, but this weekend I hooked pluto-step up to zenbot; it worked flawlessly for me while I ran gcodes in the air for about 20 minutes.
cool, I didn't see that either
I saw it, but it's still cool :)
jepler: in emc2.2.5 sim/axis, no limit switches are hooked up, but I still get an active override limits checkbox in AXIS
cradek: I think that behavior improvement may only be on trunk
I'm anxious for it; that confuses a lot of folks
enough that it's a bug fix?
jepler: I'd ask the release manager for his opinion on that
I wonder what the chances of backporting it correctly would be. It seems like it touched a lot of things.
I only found two commits for it
[16:40:23] <jepler> http://cvs.linuxcnc.org/cvs/emc2/share/axis/tcl/axis.tcl.diff?r1=1.58;r2=1.59 http://cvs.linuxcnc.org/cvs/emc2/src/emc/usr_intf/axis/scripts/axis.py.diff?r1=1.149;r2=1.150
cradek: the release manager says that if somebody wants to backport those changes to 2.2 and test it, and it's not more than those two files, then it's OK.
ok, thanks for asking him for me
cradek: who is the "release manager" ?
ok I get it :P
for emc2.1 I am; for emc2.2 jepler is
nobody has been foolhardy enough to volunteer for 2.3 yet
oh it'll be alex
we make him do all the jobs that are like work
sounds like alex just volunteered
did Alex know ?:P
oh never mind that
that is a minor detail
cradek: what bugfixes/features are candidates for backports ? are there some rules ?
bugfixes are good candidates if they are unlikely to break things
sometimes new drivers are backported because they cannot generally break anything else
new features are almost never backported
features which require configuration changes are never* backported
* for some values of never
yes we never break existing configurations in minor (bugfix) releases
hmm.. you might want to reconsider that
otherwise it'll be a long time till 2.3.0
SWPadnos: did you see the optimus tactus ?
no - multi-touch?
heh - cool
I Bet it's hard to type on though :)
yeah, I thought so too.. but it looks nice :)
I bet it'll be cheaper than maximus :D