On Nov 6 2015 4:44 PM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 06 November 2015 09:09:26 EBo wrote:
>
>> On Nov 6 2015 6:39 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
>> > On Friday 06 November 2015 04:53:15 andy pugh wrote:
>> >> On 6 November 2015 at 04:29, Fernand Veilleux
>> >>
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >> > gcode is terrible
On Friday 06 November 2015 09:09:26 EBo wrote:
> On Nov 6 2015 6:39 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> > On Friday 06 November 2015 04:53:15 andy pugh wrote:
> >> On 6 November 2015 at 04:29, Fernand Veilleux
> >>
> >
> > wrote:
> >> > gcode is terrible IMHO.
> >>
> >> It's a terrible programming language
At one time or another I have read through all of the GPL license
verbiage.If you do that, you need to have some coffee on hand,
otherwise it is nap time!
I buy and install a lot of Siemens automation hardware. Every
HMI/Operator screen that I buy comes with a small CD that has nothing on
> ...
> It seems that you deleted bringing_features
> ...
The 'bringin_features' branch rebased on git master was deleted to
avoid confustion with a newer branch 'features_preview' based
on git 2.7 (the current release)
> ...
> But you should not work with version 2.0 it is outdated, having been
A 'features_preview' branch (based on 2.7) is available for
testing. This branch incorporates the FernV repo starting at
its commit dfd2btb (marked v2.01).
Adapting 'features' to the LinuxCNC git tree required a number of
modifications to make it possible to use in both a Run-In-Place
build _and
On 11/6/15 9:38 AM, John Morris wrote:
> And of course the fix:
>
> git show glo/zultron/glo-2.6-remap-startline-fix
Merged. Thanks Zultron!
--
Sebastian Kuzminsky
--
__
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
--
___
Emc-developers mailing list
Emc-developers@lists.sourceforge.ne
On 10/29/2015 10:32 PM, John Morris wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> A feature branch [1] is ready for review that implements the G52
> instruction, 'local coordinate offsets', for increased Fanuc
> compatibility. See the top commit log for more, and read the added docs.
>
> Thanks again to Tormach for spo
On 10/30/2015 09:46 PM, Sebastian Kuzminsky wrote:
> On 10/30/2015 07:38 PM, John Morris wrote:
>> Branch at [1] and buildbot passes. I squashed your unit test commits
>> into one and picked that plus my fix off onto 2.6. Take a look and
>> merge at your leisure. Thanks!
>>
>> [1]:
>> http://git
Len,
Your questions are complicated. In order to know what you can and
cannot do you have to look at every single part that makes up the code
base - for example are you calling any libraries which are specifically
GPL? That will cause you the same problem just one level down.
Remember that
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 07:44:41PM -0700, EBo wrote:
> Mach is one thing, but if they provide the source then are they not in
> compliance?
On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 06:51:56AM -0600, Len Shelton wrote:
> Doesn't that also apply to PathPilot, then? Or is it okay to build a new
> UI and rebrand it?
On Nov 6 2015 6:39 AM, Gene Heskett wrote:
> On Friday 06 November 2015 04:53:15 andy pugh wrote:
>
>> On 6 November 2015 at 04:29, Fernand Veilleux
>>
> wrote:
>> > gcode is terrible IMHO.
>>
>> It's a terrible programming language, but then it was never intended
>> to be one.
>
> I wouldn't con
Jeff,
Doesn't that also apply to PathPilot, then? Or is it okay to build a new
UI and rebrand it?
>Len
On 11/5/2015 7:02 PM, Jeff Epler wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 11:28:00AM -0500, Dave Cole wrote:
>> GPL... ? As long as they state that they are not selling LinuxCNC,
>> how could ge
On Friday 06 November 2015 04:53:15 andy pugh wrote:
> On 6 November 2015 at 04:29, Fernand Veilleux
wrote:
> > gcode is terrible IMHO.
>
> It's a terrible programming language, but then it was never intended
> to be one.
I wouldn't condem it quite that vociferously. It has the basic trig
fun
On Nov 6 2015 6:19 AM, andy pugh wrote:
> On 6 November 2015 at 12:57, EBo wrote:
>>> It's a terrible programming language, but then it was never
>>> intended
>>> to be one.
>>
>> fine, but what is better? STEP-NC (ISO-10303/14649)?
>
> It is a machine control language, not a programming languag
On 6 November 2015 at 12:57, EBo wrote:
>> It's a terrible programming language, but then it was never intended
>> to be one.
>
> fine, but what is better? STEP-NC (ISO-10303/14649)?
It is a machine control language, not a programming language.
If you want a programming language then it probably
On Nov 6 2015 2:53 AM, andy pugh wrote:
> On 6 November 2015 at 04:29, Fernand Veilleux
> wrote:
>> gcode is terrible IMHO.
>
> It's a terrible programming language, but then it was never intended
> to be one.
fine, but what is better? STEP-NC (ISO-10303/14649)?
--
On 6 November 2015 at 04:29, Fernand Veilleux wrote:
> gcode is terrible IMHO.
It's a terrible programming language, but then it was never intended to be one.
--
atp
If you can't fix it, you don't own it.
http://www.ifixit.com/Manifesto
-
18 matches
Mail list logo
