Hi guys,
About a week ago I gave you "Some serious points to think about"
Unfortunately few reactions and no substantial promises.
Herewith my reply to several reactions:
------------
On 19.02.14 02:08, Pavel Milanes Costa wrote:
I stop the other day in the site of jallib to see the numbers of
download as a sign of the "use" of the soft... it not looks like a dead
project to me...
Indeed, there are sufficient USERs to continue with Jallib!
But we are looking for people who want/can spend time to keep the
libraries, documentation, etc. up-to-date
-------------
On 19.02.14 02:19, mattschinkel wrote:
When I was writing the tutorials and posting about them on
Jallist and elsewhere, it was good advertising. This seemed to produce
new interest.
Interest is fine, we could not do without it, but we are looking for
participation.
[about device files]. I think the answer is no, but is there any
way to automate your device file creation?
The last chapter in devicefile.html shows that much of the process is
automated. But creating something structured from the Microchip chaos
requires quite effort every time that a new group of PICs appears or to
migrate to a new release of MPLAB-X. There are always surprises, new
exceptions, new errors, etc.
choose to only update device files once per year, or whenever there is a
need to do so do too a request. I don't think people use these new
device files much.
Sounds like filling one hole with another....
For me the reason to start creating device files was because there were
none for the newer chips I wanted to use (and the few existing ones
looked ugly to me, so I started from scratch). Newer chips are still
more attractive in different ways (functionality, price), and I think we
must keep Jallib up-to-date with new developments to stay alive.
-----------
On 21.02.14 16:17, [email protected] wrote:
Perhaps the JAL group should get regular reminders
of the Jallib project, and be asked to contribute things.
We are now not explicitly asking for contributions in the form of
libraries (although these are always welcome of course), but in terms of
time and effort to keep things up-to-date.
Another concern is backup / follow-up of people. Probably nobody of the
current team knows how everything works, the tasks are distributed over
several people! When a key-member would leave the team we may have a
serious problem.
However, for we users, perhaps there should be a way for people to
contribute code, without initially having to meet the Jallib standards.
For example, I've made some changes to the "format_xxx" routines. It
would be nice if I could submit my version to a test library for others
to check out. If all is well, then I (or if "I" am not really qualified
to do the Jallib standard coding, then one of the others in the project)
could clean it up and put it in the production library.
You are supposed to know that we have a validation tool which is very
helpful in building code up to Jallib standards, and it is not difficult
to use. The main purpose of this tool is to avoid that others have to do
the 'dirty' work of cleaning up other people's code (or at least
minimize the amount of time for assistance for this). I personally
detest this, and I'm probably not the only one. Now you suggest that WE
should do more of that, while I'm asking for help with this!
------------------------------
PLEASE ......
Regards. Rob.
--
R. Hamerling, Netherlands --- http://www.robh.nl
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jallib" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/jallib.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
