Re: [Machinekit] Is machinekit broken?

[cern via Machinekit]

Hi,
Jan 9, 2021, 22:05 by moronicsm...@gmail.com:

> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit/packages/?q=python3-avahi  
> << This i dodnt even knew that it existed by reading the documentation. :)
>
> I was talking about the machinekit-hal repository. :)
>
> Regarding documentation, is there a way to get hold of you for a call? A zoom 
> or similar where i can pick you brain or start dumping parts of it to stick 
> into documentation.
> Or we could even do something like setup a Discord for contributors just to 
> be able to sync whats going on, what people are working on what needs to be 
> tested and documented.
>
Well, there is the Matrix room #machinekit:matrix.org connected to the Gitter 
room Machinekit/Machinekit and few IRC channels.

> As far as ive seen by reading thru all the code base.. the painpoints atm, is 
> outdated website, outdated documentation and lack of communication.. And this 
> is prob true for every opensource project i have been part of.
>
Yes, the site is outdated and given that the documentation is the site, then 
that's connected. I am trying to keep the communication part, I don't think it 
is that bad.

Cern.

>
> If interest, please email me at moronicsm...@gmail.com and i will get back to 
> you on my private email.
>
> lördag 9 januari 2021 kl. 03:49:45 UTC+1 skrev ce...@tuta.io:
>
>> Hello, 
>>  
>> I will try to give an honest answer, however I am sure that as a Machinekit 
>> organization maintainer, I am liable to a tinted viewpoint. 
>>  
>> Firstly, from your post I am not sure if you are talking mainly about the 
>> monorepo at >> github.com/machinekit/machinekit 
>> >>  <>> 
>> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit>> > or the separated repositories 
>> mainly in >> github.com/machinekit/machinekit-hal 
>> >> , <>> 
>> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit>> > >> 
>> github.com/machinekit/machinekit-cnc 
>> >>  <>> 
>> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit>> > and >> 
>> github.com/machinekit/emcapplication 
>> >> . <>> 
>> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit>> > But the fact is that the 
>> monorepo was deprecated and is no longer maintained or developed on. The 
>> core of development will be in Machinekit-HAL plus few connected 
>> repositories based on the momentary need and community contribution. 
>>  
>> The Achilles' heel is the documentation. The documentation is terrible. 
>> Everybody can see it. It would be great to get it to a better shape. But 
>> that would actually mean to completely rewrite it. Because I don't think 
>> there is a chance for salvaging it. I also think that there is a more 
>> pressing task in need of completion. That is the CMAKE port I am currently 
>> working on - it is going a lot slower than I would like because it is 
>> connected with restructuralizing of the codebase tree (which is completely 
>> insane at the moment), but it will - I think - allow to shed the dependency 
>> on Debian based distribution for bigger pool of GNU Linux ones. 
>>  
>> You may think that it is counterproductive to focus on development when the 
>> documentation is in the state in which it is - but one has to remember that 
>> Machinekit (all of its repositories) is mostly used in companies and company 
>> specific products. 
>>  
>>  
>> Jan 4, 2021, 23:24 by >> moroni...@gmail.com <>>> : 
>>  
>> > I have spent the better part of a couple of evenings trying to get it to 
>> > run from sourcecode. 
>> > 
>> > And i can tell you, its only because i really know my way around linuxcnc 
>> > as a devops i actually managed to get anything done. 
>> > 
>> > But here is some notes. 
>> > Repository / prebuilt packages 
>> > - They work. 
>> > 
>> There currently are multiple repositories. The old ones are the >> 
>> deb.machinekit.io >>  are in process of 
>> deprecation (as they are hosted on private server of long gone Machinekit 
>> member with no change of getting access). The new ones are hosted on 
>> Cloudsmith service: >> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/>>  
>>  
>> Specifically: 
>> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit/packages/>>  - for common 
>> dependencies 
>> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit-hal/packages/>>  <>> 
>> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit/packages/>> > - for 
>> Machinekit-HAL 
>> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/emcapplication/packages/>>  - for 
>> EMCApplication 
>> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/mksocfpga/packages/>>  - for 
>> MKSoCFPGA 
>>  
>> > 
>> > - But they are missing machinekit-dev package. 
>> >   - This is important if you wanna develop anything without needing to 
>> > setup from source. 
>> > 
>> That's should be working, respective not the machinekit-dev one, as that is 
>> from the monorepo, but the machinekit-hal-de

Re: [Machinekit] Is machinekit broken?

[Moronic Smurf]

https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit/packages/?q=python3-avahi  
<< This i dodnt even knew that it existed by reading the documentation. :)

I was talking about the machinekit-hal repository. :)

Regarding documentation, is there a way to get hold of you for a call? A 
zoom or similar where i can pick you brain or start dumping parts of it to 
stick into documentation.
Or we could even do something like setup a Discord for contributors just to 
be able to sync whats going on, what people are working on what needs to be 
tested and documented.
As far as ive seen by reading thru all the code base.. the painpoints atm, 
is outdated website, outdated documentation and lack of communication.. And 
this is prob true for every opensource project i have been part of.

If interest, please email me at moronicsm...@gmail.com and i will get back 
to you on my private email.

lördag 9 januari 2021 kl. 03:49:45 UTC+1 skrev ce...@tuta.io:

> Hello,
>
> I will try to give an honest answer, however I am sure that as a 
> Machinekit organization maintainer, I am liable to a tinted viewpoint.
>
> Firstly, from your post I am not sure if you are talking mainly about the 
> monorepo at github.com/machinekit/machinekit <
> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit> or the separated repositories 
> mainly in github.com/machinekit/machinekit-hal, <
> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit> 
> github.com/machinekit/machinekit-cnc <
> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit> and 
> github.com/machinekit/emcapplication. <
> http://github.com/machinekit/machinekit> But the fact is that the 
> monorepo was deprecated and is no longer maintained or developed on. The 
> core of development will be in Machinekit-HAL plus few connected 
> repositories based on the momentary need and community contribution.
>
> The Achilles' heel is the documentation. The documentation is terrible. 
> Everybody can see it. It would be great to get it to a better shape. But 
> that would actually mean to completely rewrite it. Because I don't think 
> there is a chance for salvaging it. I also think that there is a more 
> pressing task in need of completion. That is the CMAKE port I am currently 
> working on - it is going a lot slower than I would like because it is 
> connected with restructuralizing of the codebase tree (which is completely 
> insane at the moment), but it will - I think - allow to shed the dependency 
> on Debian based distribution for bigger pool of GNU Linux ones.
>
> You may think that it is counterproductive to focus on development when 
> the documentation is in the state in which it is - but one has to remember 
> that Machinekit (all of its repositories) is mostly used in companies and 
> company specific products.
>
>
> Jan 4, 2021, 23:24 by moroni...@gmail.com:
>
> > I have spent the better part of a couple of evenings trying to get it to 
> run from sourcecode.
> >
> > And i can tell you, its only because i really know my way around 
> linuxcnc as a devops i actually managed to get anything done.
> >
> > But here is some notes.
> > Repository / prebuilt packages
> > - They work.
> >
> There currently are multiple repositories. The old ones are the 
> deb.machinekit.io are in process of deprecation (as they are hosted on 
> private server of long gone Machinekit member with no change of getting 
> access). The new ones are hosted on Cloudsmith service: 
> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/
>
> Specifically:
> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit/packages/ - for common 
> dependencies
> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit-hal/packages/ <
> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit/packages/> - for 
> Machinekit-HAL
> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/emcapplication/packages/ - for 
> EMCApplication
> https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/mksocfpga/packages/ - for 
> MKSoCFPGA
>
> >
> > - But they are missing machinekit-dev package.
> >   - This is important if you wanna develop anything without needing to 
> setup from source.
> >
> That's should be working, respective not the machinekit-dev one, as that 
> is from the monorepo, but the machinekit-hal-dev one.
>
> >
> > Building my own packages
> > - The build tools for building a developer environment. Containers is 
> great, but its really overcomplicating the crap out of it. It was way 
> easier to just go grab the commands out of the docker scripts and run it 
> locally.
> >
> I like them. So this may be on me. They help me keep things clean. Of 
> course to just run the scripts locally should be also possible.
>
> >
> > - The dependency tree disaster.. there is so many package that is in 
> use, and so little documentation. I started a list of packages i needed to 
> get installed before even running configure.. its in the ball park of 60.. 
> and many of them are outdated, removed, or just not possible to get working 
> on a debian 9 or 10 installation
> >
> The easiest way is to just use the mk-build-deps d

Re: [Machinekit] Is machinekit broken?

[cern via Machinekit]

Hello,

I will try to give an honest answer, however I am sure that as a Machinekit 
organization maintainer, I am liable to a tinted viewpoint.

Firstly, from your post I am not sure if you are talking mainly about the 
monorepo at github.com/machinekit/machinekit 
 or the separated repositories mainly 
in github.com/machinekit/machinekit-hal, 
 github.com/machinekit/machinekit-cnc 
 and 
github.com/machinekit/emcapplication.  
But the fact is that the monorepo was deprecated and is no longer maintained or 
developed on. The core of development will be in Machinekit-HAL plus few 
connected repositories based on the momentary need and community contribution.

The Achilles' heel is the documentation. The documentation is terrible. 
Everybody can see it. It would be great to get it to a better shape. But that 
would actually mean to completely rewrite it. Because I don't think there is a 
chance for salvaging it. I also think that there is a more pressing task in 
need of completion. That is the CMAKE port I am currently working on - it is 
going a lot slower than I would like because it is connected with 
restructuralizing of the codebase tree (which is completely insane at the 
moment), but it will - I think - allow to shed the dependency on Debian based 
distribution for bigger pool of GNU Linux ones.

You may think that it is counterproductive to focus on development when the 
documentation is in the state in which it is - but one has to remember that 
Machinekit (all of its repositories) is mostly used in companies and company 
specific products.


Jan 4, 2021, 23:24 by moronicsm...@gmail.com:

> I have spent the better part of a couple of evenings trying to get it to run 
> from sourcecode.
>
> And i can tell you, its only because i really know my way around linuxcnc as 
> a devops i actually managed to get anything done.
>
> But here is some notes.
> Repository / prebuilt packages
> - They work.
>
There currently are multiple repositories. The old ones are the 
deb.machinekit.io are in process of deprecation (as they are hosted on private 
server of long gone Machinekit member with no change of getting access). The 
new ones are hosted on Cloudsmith service: 
https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/

Specifically:
https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit/packages/ - for common 
dependencies
https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/machinekit-hal/packages/ 
 - for 
Machinekit-HAL
https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/emcapplication/packages/ - for 
EMCApplication
https://cloudsmith.io/~machinekit/repos/mksocfpga/packages/ - for MKSoCFPGA

>
> - But they are missing machinekit-dev package.
>   - This is important if you wanna develop anything without needing to setup 
> from source.
>
That's should be working, respective not the machinekit-dev one, as that is 
from the monorepo, but the machinekit-hal-dev one.

>
> Building my own packages
> - The build tools for building a developer environment. Containers is great, 
> but its really overcomplicating the crap out of it. It was way easier to just 
> go grab the commands out of the docker scripts and run it locally.
>
I like them. So this may be on me. They help me keep things clean. Of course to 
just run the scripts locally should be also possible.

>
> - The dependency tree disaster.. there is so many package that is in use, and 
> so little documentation. I started a list of packages i needed to get 
> installed before even running configure.. its in the ball park of 60.. and 
> many of them are outdated, removed, or just not possible to get working on a 
> debian 9 or 10 installation
>
The easiest way is to just use the mk-build-deps debian script. This is also 
the reason behind the container's usage - it is just so easy to delete the 
whole FS when one is done and no longer wants to have it installed.

And all of them can be currently installed.

>
> Splitting machinekit into two repositories.
> - Well this is a case of the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
>   - Why.. well from a programmers standpoint i can understand it being 
> smaller chunks to manage, but from the point of view of the user its quite 
> hard to grasp all the concepts that has been applied without go digging into 
> scripts, support stuff and other things the "user" usually don't really care 
> for.
>
The idea behind it is to have sometime in the future a ready-made container 
with Machinekit-HAL+EMCApplication+whatever else or just to install the lowest 
package in the dependency tree. Like the EMCApplication. (It's currently little 
convoluted because Debian packaging leaves a lot to be desired and currently on 
its own cannot solve a dependency tree of multiple projects going at different 
vectors. So you need for EMCApplication to

[Machinekit] Is machinekit broken?

[Moronic Smurf]

I have spent the better part of a couple of evenings trying to get it to 
run from sourcecode.

And i can tell you, its only because i really know my way around linuxcnc 
as a devops i actually managed to get anything done.

But here is some notes.
Repository / prebuilt packages
- They work.

- But they are missing machinekit-dev package.
  - This is important if you wanna develop anything without needing to 
setup from source.

Building my own packages
- The build tools for building a developer environment. Containers is 
great, but its really overcomplicating the crap out of it. It was way 
easier to just go grab the commands out of the docker scripts and run it 
locally.

- The dependency tree disaster.. there is so many package that is in use, 
and so little documentation. I started a list of packages i needed to get 
installed before even running configure.. its in the ball park of 60.. and 
many of them are outdated, removed, or just not possible to get working on 
a debian 9 or 10 installation

Splitting machinekit into two repositories.
- Well this is a case of the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  - Why.. well from a programmers standpoint i can understand it being 
smaller chunks to manage, but from the point of view of the user its quite 
hard to grasp all the concepts that has been applied without go digging 
into scripts, support stuff and other things the "user" usually don't 
really care for.

In the end i got all the packages built with no fuss, and was gonna runt 
the ol' dpkg -i machinekit-hal - and well.. what do you know.. it requires 
more package dependcies.. on packages that doesnt even exist anymore .. 
like "python3-avahi" .. That now makes the whole effort useless..

And final thought.. the prebuilt packages on archive is version 0.2, when 
building my own packages i made a jump to 0.4.. when going to git and 
looking in the branches.. well what do you know.. no 0.2 to be found or any 
other branch...

Please at least follow some.. "rules".. make sure the compatibility 
packages can be built, like if its gonna be a split of source code.. make 
sure there is coherent documentation on how to compile it.. When compiling 
i get the machinekit-dev package btw, why isnt that on archive?!

I'm working as a senior devops / project manager in my day to day.. I will 
happily pitch in with some organizationl chops and hand pointing if it 
would help the project.. Also happy writing documentation. I basically 
already have for my experiments with this.

-- 
website: http://www.machinekit.io blog: http://blog.machinekit.io github: 
https://github.com/machinekit
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Machinekit" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to machinekit+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/machinekit/b83674b1-a8fc-4c28-bb06-62cb0d754e53n%40googlegroups.com.