[minima] Re: pcbs for the minima
- From: Thomas Sarlandie <thomas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "minima@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <minima@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 00:09:08 -0800
Farhan,
I would be happy to help with the software part of the project. I have more
experience there ;) and I already have several projects on my github
account that receive regular contributions (my pwm module for the raspberry
pi is the most popular: https://github.com/sarfata/pi-blaster).
I am sure we can find easy and clean ways to support multiple configuration
of the minima (with encoder, with different screen, different cpus, etc).
We just have to set reasonable limits otherwise it will become very
complicated to understand the source code, and contributors will not be
able to test their changes on every configuration.
One thing you should really do first to encourage contributions is define a
clear license for the source code. I think most people like to do MIT
License nowadays. It is very permissive and allows re-use in commercial and
non-commercial context.
GPL would be a good choice too here: no-one would be allowed to distribute
the program without the source. All changes will have to be re-published.
Both are fine with me!
73,
thomas
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 7:41 PM, <farhanbox@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Joe,
> I hope we can refactor our code to use various 'device drivers'. But right
> now, it is messy. We did manage to separate out the si570 code. But we will
> need to similarly break it up into bandswitching, tuning and cw modules.
> Then we could generate our own versions to confirm to various hardware.
> For instance, I can see that the arduino could be used to control bitx
> class of transceivers. We will need to restrict the frequency range, remobe
> bandswitching etc.
>
> My dabbling with open source had been limited to writing few modules for a
> few software. I'd appreciate if someone can be the benevolent dictator of
> the radiono software.
>
> - f
> Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel
> ------------------------------
> *From: * Joe Street <jstreet@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Sender: * minima-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Date: *Mon, 24 Feb 2014 22:15:59 -0500
> *To: *<minima@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *ReplyTo: * minima@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject: *[minima] Re: pcbs for the minima
>
> I don't understand your comment that " it has a software component that
> cannot be forked for different pcb layouts". Why not? That is usually
> what happens in open source projects because different people want to use
> different parts and do different things. Is there some reason why this
> cannot be the case here?
>
> Joe
>
> On 24/02/2014 12:48 PM, Ashhar Farhan wrote:
>
>
> the minima is a combination of software and hardware. we cannot have
> multiple versions of design as that will lead to multiple versions of the
> arduino software.
>
> the circuit is still evolving and given that it has a software component
> that cannot be forked for different pcb layouts, i have asked everybody to
> refrain from commercializing the design. the software may need some changes
> in the circuit as well. builders may be disappointed.
>
> 1. now it is clear to me that the T/R line needs an external pull-up as
> different arduino boards have different pull-up resistors. I have also
> eliminated the need for a bulky relay in the BFO.
>
> 2. In the interest of PCB layout, it might be better if we swapped some
> of the digital lines around from the arduino.
>
> 3. we are still debating over the best way to switch the LPFs. this
> opens up the question of how many arduino lines should be used for band
> switching etc.
>
> sandeep has produced a limited run of the boards for the early
> experimenters with my permission for the few builders who are willing to
> help in evolving the design. after this run, he will not produce any more
> boards.
>
> i am explicitly asking people to stop selling any pcbs for the minima
> until further notice.
>
> sunil, please stop advertising these boards. i have explicitly
> instructions to not produce any pcb without my approval.
>
> with the permission of this group, i'd like to exercise release control
> over the design. when we think it is repeatable and stable, we can push the
> button for the kit-builders. until then, we must scratch build this.
>
> i hope everyone understands this. we don't want the builders to be left
> unsupported.
>
> - f
>
>
>
Other related posts:
