Hi guys,
Currently cleaning validated. Here's what done (please have a careful look,
it will also be used as the CHANGES log file)
* removed "validated/sample/by_device/16hv615" directory
* deleted b<pic>.jal blink samples
* added new blink_<pic>.jal samples, but only for those which were already
in validated, *no more*
* replaced device files in validated by those in unvalidated (no more
added). Now version is 0.0.53
* also replaced chidef_jallib.jal lib
* replaced lib:
* lcd_hd44780_4.jal, delay.jal, print, adc_hardware, i2c_hardware,
pwm_ccp{1..5}, pwm_common, serial_hardware, serial_hw_int_cts,
serial_software (license change)
* format.jal (new procedure format_time_word)
* pic_data_eeprom.jal (debug, lots of improvements like handle memory >
256 B)
* i2c_software (some fixes ?)
* replaced sample hello_world_lcd for 16f690, 16f819, 16f88 (minor changes
?)
* added new external co2, humidity, temperature, keyboard libs
* added new jal calendar and rtc_isr_tmr0 lib
* added samples for:
* 16f648a: data_eeprom_16f648a.jal (why pic name in the filename ?)
* 16f876a: keyboard_lcd, rtc_lcd, sht, t6603, tc77, etc... all except
rtc_timeset
* 16f88: data_eeprom
* 18f242: data_eeprom
* 18f2620: data_eeprom
Few more things:
- I did not add new device files.
- I did not add "test" map with board and test files because they are used
(or supposed to be) to generate samples, and we release only samples (which
are ready-to-compile).
- Do I add i2c_level1 ?
- I agree now.jal is not a library, so I did not add it. Hence samples
using it not added too. (sample_rtc_timeset.jal)
- I've regenerated jalapi doc
Phew.... Too much manual operations, we need to find something...
I'll try to setup a new bot for validated. We may have some surprises :)
Cheers,
Seb
--
Sébastien Lelong
http://www.sirloon.net
http://sirbot.org
2008/12/7 Sebastien LELONG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi guys,
>
> [sorry for this boring post... :) ]. Line with "=>" is where I'd need your
> input.
>
> I've done some investigation, comparing "validated" and "unvalidated" map.
> The
> aim is the final 0.1 (because, IIUC, you'd want to release ?), and this is
> also useful to know what to put in validated.
>
> (and ultimately, I could completely script a release process)
> (and also, once everything that need to be in "validated" is in
> "validated",
> I'll run my jallib script against "validated" to generate test pages, so
> you
> don't have to deal with it).
>
>
> Here's what I've done:
>
> * checkout a freshly, new jallib trunk directory from the repos, to avoid
> any "local changes" to be included in the investigation
> * recursive diff:
>
> LANG=C diff -r validated unvalidated 2>&1 | tee out
>
> Now analysing "out".
>
> 1. Files only found in "validated":
>
>
> grep "^Only" out | grep -v \.svn | grep 'Only in validated' >
> only_in_validated.out
>
> These are mostly blink files, which have been renamed from "b<pic>.jal"
> to "blink_<pic>.jal".
>
> => Old blink files in validated must be copied again with new ones
>
> Now, weird thing: sample directory "16hv615" cannot be found in
> unvalidated.
> This directory is empty...
>
> => Can I remove empty "validated/sample/by_device/16hv615" directory ?
>
>
> 2. Files found in both "validated" and "unvalidated", but changed:
>
> * grep '^diff -r' out | grep -v \.svn > changed.out
> * for f in `grep '^diff -r' out | grep -v \.svn | grep \.jal\$ |
> awk '{print $3}'`; do echo diff $f un$f;diff $f un$f; done >
> changed_details.out
> * cat changed_details.out | grep -v '^. --' | egrep -e '^diff|[\>\|\<]' >
> changed_code_only.out
>
> Many changes are due to the license changes (see "changed_details.out"
> file).
> And some are "real" fixes, I mean, impacts are in the code, not only in
> comments (see "changed_code_only.out")
>
> => what ever the changes, we should overwrite from unvalidated to
> validated. Right ?
>
>
> 3. Finally, files only found in "unvalidated"
>
> grep "^Only" out | grep -v \.svn | grep 'Only in unvalidated' >
> only_in_unvalidated.out
>
>
> There are:
> * directories, found in unvalidated, but not in validated. I've added
> some,
> like "rtc", "temperature", "co2"
> * there're html files, about API. This is normal.
> * there's a "test" directory. Yes, no "test" directory in "validared".
> Should we consider adding it ?
> * and there's the remaining :) devide files, blink files, samples, libs.
>
> => This is where I need your help. From the remaining, what should go
> to "validated", and then in the release ?
>
>
> You'll find attached all those files coming from "my investigation".
>
> One more thought: maybe we should consider moving files from "unvalidated"
> to "validated", regurlarly, to avoid this. If there's no debate about API,
> about naming conventions, about I dunno, maybe the author should consider
> to
> copy his files and ALL ITS DEPENDENCIES to "validated". Because files
> would
> copied from time to time, I could also put a bot on "validated".
>
> What your point on this ? Do you see any potential problems ?
>
>
> Cheers,
> Seb
> --
> Sébastien LELONG
> http://www.sirloon.net
> http://sirbot.org
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"jallib" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/jallib?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
