1.5 development planning thread - page 8 - General Discussion and Assistance - CHDK Forum
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9   Go Down

1.5 development planning thread

  • 89 Replies
  • 46962 Views
*

Offline blackhole

  • *****
  • 946
  • A590IS 101b
    • Planetary astrophotography
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #70 on: 17 / October / 2020, 05:00:16 »
Advertisements
Upgrade for the Croatian language.
Logged
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 14126
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #71 on: 17 / October / 2020, 16:43:14 »
Quote from: blackhole on 17 / October / 2020, 05:00:16
Upgrade for the Croatian language.
Thanks. Added in 5590. Note there were a couple of other changes in strings before 638, as described in the https://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=14124.0
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline blackhole

  • *****
  • 946
  • A590IS 101b
    • Planetary astrophotography
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #72 on: 17 / October / 2020, 17:43:25 »
Quote from: reyalp on 17 / October / 2020, 16:43:14
Thanks. Added in 5590. Note there were a couple of other changes in strings before 638, as described in the https://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=14124.0
Here are added omitted items (# 101, # 274) and corrected several spelling errors.
Logged
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 14126
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #73 on: 17 / October / 2020, 18:14:55 »
Quote from: blackhole on 17 / October / 2020, 17:43:25
Here are added omitted items (# 101, # 274) and corrected several spelling errors.
Thanks, added in 5591
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 14126
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #74 on: 18 / October / 2020, 22:15:14 »
Quote from: msl on 15 / October / 2020, 16:44:46
It might make sense to check the alpha or beta status of various cameras.
Yes. In IRC, waterwingz suggested "bump every port more than one year old to at least beta and anything more than 3 years old to released?"

I think that's a good starting point, though I'd make an exception for ports known to be very incomplete or broken as "alpha", and also defer to any developers on their own ports.

These labels have always been problematic, given that we don't really know how complete or tested most ports are. What I generally hope to convey is:
PREALPHA - known significantly incomplete, majorly broken, or completely untested
ALPHA - known incomplete, major features known broken, or minimally tested
BETA - lightly tested, minor features known incomplete / broken

If a port has been available for a few years without complaints, I'm OK with treating that as being at least lightly tested. It's not a great assumption (we have little idea how many people use CHDK, or try port and find it broken without posting), but we don't have much better to go on.

We do have some evidence from posts that people are scared off by the ALPHA / BETA labels, like "I wanted to try it, but there is only an alpha build"

That leaves the task of figuring out which ports it applies to  :-[

Attached is a list of current statuses of ports enabled in the autobuild, as of r5594 (grep 'ALPHA\|BETA' camera_list.csv | grep -v SKIP)
There's kind of a lot... 84 total subs.

Some specific cases

Digic 6 ports general:
IMO, completed digic 6 ports don't need a special label. Most CHDK functionality works at this point and they are fine for everyday use. I've removed the alpha/beta labels from my ports.
Based on that, I'd remove the labels from sx60, sx280/270/275, sx700, g5x

EOS M cameras: These are still labeled PREALPHA
I'm not really clear what ILC specific issues remain. Some people appear to use these ports extensively.

ixus160_elph160
There were a couple of instances of hardware damage (https://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=13372.0, https://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=12321.msg123736#msg123736) early on, but it has been widely used since.

G7X2
Given the newness of digic 7, I'd lean to calling it PREALPHA for a while.

I believe many of the other ALPHA ports were blind ports. In 1.5 development, a bunch of them should have at least had the chdkptp camtests and ND tests run.

A couple of problem ports aren't labeled
ixus220_elph300hs has bizarre, unresolved issues with PTP https://chdk.setepontos.com/index.php?topic=6341.msg141960#msg141960
ixus1000_sd4500 has issues with overrides, unclear ND or aperture, and IIRC various other problems
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline philmoz

  • *****
  • 3450
    • Photos
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #75 on: 19 / October / 2020, 03:23:05 »
Sounds good to me.


Phil.
Logged
CHDK ports:
  sx30is (1.00c, 1.00h, 1.00l, 1.00n & 1.00p)
  g12 (1.00c, 1.00e, 1.00f & 1.00g)
  sx130is (1.01d & 1.01f)
  ixus310hs (1.00a & 1.01a)
  sx40hs (1.00d, 1.00g & 1.00i)
  g1x (1.00e, 1.00f & 1.00g)
  g5x (1.00c, 1.01a, 1.01b)
  g7x2 (1.01a, 1.01b, 1.10b)
*

Offline c_joerg

  • *****
  • 1251
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #76 on: 19 / October / 2020, 03:41:56 »
Quote from: reyalp on 18 / October / 2020, 22:15:14
EOS M cameras: These are still labeled PREALPHA
I'm not really clear what ILC specific issues remain. Some people appear to use these ports extensively.

My M3 runs very stable with CHDK. From my point of view, the PREALPHA can be removed.
Logged
M100 100a, M3 121a, G9x II (1.00c), 2*G1x (101a,100e), S110 (103a), SX50 (100c), SX230 (101a), S45,
Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/136329431@N06/albums
YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCrTH0tHy9OYTVDzWIvXEMlw/videos?shelf_id=0&view=0&sort=dd
*

Offline blackhole

  • *****
  • 946
  • A590IS 101b
    • Planetary astrophotography
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #77 on: 19 / October / 2020, 11:20:32 »
I would just comment on a few cameras. I have been using the SX410 and SX530 for a few years now and there is no problem, the alpha status can be deleted. The SX520 shares the same firmware with the SX530 so there should be no problems, all these cameras have been in the autobuild server for several years.
The SX610 and SX620 have been on the autobuild server for a long time and have been tested quite well, the alpha status can be deleted.
The ixus 275 has been on the autobuild server the same for a long time and is well tested, the alpha status can be deleted.
I think we can add Ixus 265 to the autobuild server, @whim uses that camera and I believe he would let us know if there are any problems.
The SX420 is not very intensively tested but the prealpha status can be deleted and possibly replaced with beta status, autobuild is disabled for this camera. Judging by the available reports, there are no problems with this camera.
The SX430 is also not intensively tested, the source code currently contains the wrong GPIO address. There is no response to the test version with the correct GPIO address. Autobuild is disabled for this camera, I wouldn't change anything there.
The ixus 285 also has the wrong GPIO address in the source code but it was recently reported that the test version works well with the correct GPIO address (0xC022F48C). That needs to change. There are no reports of any other problems with this camera.
Logged
*

Offline srsa_4c

  • ******
  • 4451
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #78 on: 19 / October / 2020, 17:16:45 »
Quote from: reyalp on 18 / October / 2020, 22:15:14
Based on that, I'd remove the labels from (...) sx280/270/275 (...)
OK

Quote
EOS M cameras: These are still labeled PREALPHA
I'm not really clear what ILC specific issues remain.
Getting/setting focus. IIRC one thing that prevented me from trying a workaround is that focus distance is measured differently in PowerShots and ILCs - from lens vs. from sensor.
So, the prealpha label is due to missing features, not stability. It can probably be upgraded or removed.
Logged
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 14126
Re: 1.5 development planning thread
« Reply #79 on: 19 / October / 2020, 22:31:10 »
Quote from: blackhole on 19 / October / 2020, 11:20:32
I would just comment on a few cameras.
Thanks, this is very helpful. Statuses updated in r5595. I also adjust the notes saying THIS IS AN INCOMPLETE ALPHA PORT and similar.

Quote
I have been using the SX410 and SX530 for a few years now and there is no problem, the alpha status can be deleted. The SX520 shares the same firmware with the SX530 so there should be no problems, all these cameras have been in the autobuild server for several years.
Done. I noticed in the notes these don't have full jogdial support implemented. This should be pretty easy to fix if you have one. -  I see this was previously discussed in the development thread, and these cameras have a control dial like the sx60, rather than a classic jogdial.

Quote
The SX610 and SX620 have been on the autobuild server for a long time and have been tested quite well, the alpha status can be deleted.
The ixus 275 has been on the autobuild server the same for a long time and is well tested, the alpha status can be deleted.
I think we can add Ixus 265 to the autobuild server, @whim uses that camera and I believe he would let us know if there are any problems.
Done
Quote
The SX420 is not very intensively tested but the prealpha status can be deleted and possibly replaced with beta status, autobuild is disabled for this camera. Judging by the available reports, there are no problems with this camera.
I think if anything is ready to be labeled beta, it can be in the autobuild. If a few people have used it without complaints, maybe it should be enabled as alpha for now?

Quote from: srsa_4c on 19 / October / 2020, 17:16:45
Getting/setting focus. IIRC one thing that prevented me from trying a workaround is that focus distance is measured differently in PowerShots and ILCs - from lens vs. from sensor.
So, the prealpha label is due to missing features, not stability. It can probably be upgraded or removed.
I switched these to BETA, under the rationalization that ILC support is BETA ;)

We're down to 53
« Last Edit: 20 / October / 2020, 00:42:31 by reyalp »
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 [8] 9   Go Up
« previous next »
 

Related Topics


SimplePortal © 2008-2014, SimplePortal