开云体育

Dear @DiSLord, @OneOfEleven @Holger and others

I am very impressed with the progress made on both the -H and -H4 firmware and the NanoVNA-Saver and the work you are doing.

However, I want to raise a concern as I see this project go the way of many other open-source community projects where the energy and initiative starts running low before the project and development has been stabilised for general use. The last few weeks have especially been chaotic for the normal users, with various releases trying to maximise performance.

I thus want to urge that we pause chasing new features and higher performance, and work together to release and test stable versions of the firmware and PC programs. If we don't we risk losing the support of the many users that have no interest in development and maximum performance, but just want a stable, usable NanoVNA for their RF and antenna projects work.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 11:05 AM, RandMental wrote:

Dear @DiSLord, @OneOfEleven @Holger and others

I am very impressed with the progress made on both the -H and -H4 firmware
and the NanoVNA-Saver and the work you are doing.
..
I thus want to urge that we pause chasing new features and higher performance,
and work together to release and test stable versions of the firmware and PC
programs. ..

I would also recommend to update the individual githubs with latest stable source versions such other potential contributors may test/debug/improve.
Great work guys, congratulation!

Sounds like a good idea to me :)

All I've really been doing is sharing what I've been doing for my own use, and adding what I can that others have requested, though difficult to keep up with demand at times, phew.

My last stable release
NanoVNA v0.8.4.5

And included SD carts
NanoVNA_0.9.3.4

Youcan get it from /g/nanovna-users/files/Dislord%27s%20Nanovna%20-H%20Firmware

At this moment i try get 192k ADC mode, and if all ok i hope on base 1.0.12 made stable release.
All beta, - just for test, i can`t test it all, on my devices all work good, but on others not. And i try made work on all (i write about it, i slowdown most oveclocked modes for get better stable variant).

That is a great idea - I guess the typical approach of having a master (stable) repository, and one or more development focused repositories would be a great start.

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 11:52 AM, DiSlord wrote:

My last stable release
NanoVNA v0.8.4.5

And included SD carts
NanoVNA_0.9.3.4

Youcan get it from
/g/nanovna-users/files/Dislord%27s%20Nanovna%20-H%20Firmware

At this moment i try get 192k ADC mode, and if all ok i hope on base 1.0.12
made stable release.
All beta, - just for test, i can`t test it all, on my devices all work good,
but on others not. And i try made work on all (i write about it, i slowdown
most oveclocked modes for get better stable variant).

Those are the .dfu binaries, in open-source projects sources are important (as you may build the binaries out of them)..
Could you at least indicate which commits builds those binaries?
Thanks.

@OneOfEleven and @DiSlord

Could I ask that you create a StableRelease repository in your GITHUB accounts and load the version's source code, (updated) build instructions for Windows, Ubuntu and MacOS, as well as the relevant DFU's files in there.

We can the point all new users to these to update their devices, rather that they try an make sense of all our development exchanges and tests.

Appreciate you assistance

regards,

RandMental

I try see git history and write it.

When I started making fixes for the firmware, I didn't think about full code support. My fixes were added to Edy555's repository. After 0.8, he stopped following the project. For myself, I made corrections, but did not make releases. At the moment, I plan to bring it to 192k mode and make a stable release (I think that now I understand the reasons for the freezes, during the 768k tests I began to receive them more often, but with low BW no) and I think to reduce the frequency change rate.

Then maybe I will gradually finish the rest.

@Dislord: do you still consider the project open-source?

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 07:50 AM, igor-m wrote:

@Dislord: do you still consider the project open-source?

Not understand. All my code open on git you can use it.
Last stable code (96k mode and SD card support, and UI) also on github and open.

Or i must add on my github every my test option?

Or ... i should support code? But sorry for this need a lot of time, and this not my main work.

Dear @DiSLord, @OneOfEleven @Holger and others

May I suggest new topics with tag #stable and others with #development for your work? And the subject, aldough generic, should point the scope of the topic: "Nanovna-H and H4 Firmware , SD card, LSI and LSE" for example :)

This will help users like me who wants to take part in the testing to give feedback and prevent that too much good information (like how to use, new features, etc) is "lost" in so many user inputs and versions.


On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 10:05 AM, RandMental wrote:

Dear @DiSLord, @OneOfEleven @Holger and others

I thus want to urge that we pause chasing new features and higher performance,
and work together to release and test stable versions of the firmware and PC
programs. If we don't we risk losing the support of the many users that have
no interest in development and maximum performance, but just want a stable,
usable NanoVNA for their RF and antenna projects work.

Thank you RandMental!

I am a “normal user” and have failed to make saver function on three different machines and four operating systems. I have had lots of help but I’m too ignorant to put it to good use. For instance I have finally got saver to operate on one of my 32 bit windows 7 machine. However, I can’t get it to connect to my nanoVNA. Previous to the installation of saver I was able to get it to show up in device manager. Afterward, it ceased to do so. I saw an earlier post that dealt with this issue and I will pursue that later.

SUGGESTION! Could you guys start a user group for us “normal users”? It could include nanovna-users, NanoVNA-2, and tinysa. I went two days without checking my email and found over 250 emails in my inbox. You could post links to stable saver versions and methods to deal with common problems. Please develop a version for windows 7 on a 32 bit machine. I have at least four of them. Can I ship one to someone who knows how to do it?

Also I would be willing to test some of these versions. I am obviously a “normal user” and would be a good test. I have a 64 bit MacBook Pro with VMware fusion with Windows 7 Pro. I also have a 32 bit windows 7 pro and a desktop window 7 pro that I use regularly.

Thanks to all of you,

Joe

Joe Joncas WA7MHB
Lincoln County Radio Amateur Club
541-272-3207
joe1@...

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 05:58 PM, DiSlord wrote:

On Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 07:50 AM, igor-m wrote:

@Dislord: do you still consider the project open-source?

Not understand. All my code open on git you can use it.
Last stable code (96k mode and SD card support, and UI) also on github and
open.

When you distribute the 1.0.XX binaries (like here on this forum or on cqham.ru or vrtp.ru) you shall provide the source code on your github too.
It does NOT matter whether those binaries are called "final" or "beta".
For example - with "1.0.14" beta binary the community has to be able to build the "1.0.14 beta" out of the source code on your github.

Or i must add on my github every my test option?

Yes. Otherwise one can distribute "test" or "beta" binaries for next 10years without providing source code. And the "open-source" project bites the dust.

Or ... i should support code? But sorry for this need a lot of time, and this
not my main work.

Nobody can ask you to support the code, this is an open source project.
HTH

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 02:57 AM, igor-m wrote:

Yes. Otherwise one can distribute "test" or "beta" binaries for next 10years without providing source code. And the "open-source" project bites the dust.

I not want answer on every try, then users begin compile from git.
I not want provide not stable code on release.

I have already answered this question, and I will not change my attitude about when and how to upload the finished code.

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 12:13 PM, DiSlord wrote:

On Thu, Aug 6, 2020 at 02:57 AM, igor-m wrote:

Yes. Otherwise one can distribute "test" or "beta" binaries for next 10years

without providing source code. And the "open-source" project bites the dust.

I not want answer on every try, then users begin compile from git.
I not want provide not stable code on release.

I have already answered this question, and I will not change my attitude about
when and how to upload the finished code.

Thus you write you will distribute your binaries derived from sources licensed under GPL without providing the source code?

Ok. I stop public binaries.

@Dislord: could you update your github with the sources for the v1.0.14 beta binary .dfu you have already distributed?
Thanks.

I delete my NanoVNA git, and cleanup all provided binaries from this forum

Continue fix for self, GPLv3 allow it

OK, after reading various messages on here I have decided I no longer want to be involved, it's far too messy and unpleasant, all I want and now need in my now later years of life is for it to be nice and trouble free and pleasantly quiet.

I'm more than happy just doing my own code for my own personal needs.

Their are lots of other people who can contribute though, so all is not lost.

xx

Thanks to OneOfEleven and Discord for their valuable contributions;
no good deed goes unpunished.