DIYEFI.org Forum

As the title and poll question say, what shall I release as 0.1.0? This version has the distinction of being the first to run a real engine. Does this mean I should just let you have it as it was, warts and issues and bugs and all? OR, shall I attempt to polish it a little bit before I send it out? Not major stuff, just some regressions from before and some little niggles and tidy ups etc.

Post and vote away!

Fred.

It's version 0.1, not version 1.0

Warts please!

Release early, release often.

For the record, I voted "other" so as not to skew the results.

I tend to think it's a bit of a lie to fix stuff and then say "this ran the volvo" when the thing that ran the volvo had the issues on it (though I could not tell driving it). On the other hand it seems wrong to bang out 0.1.0 (which is significant, despite a leading zero) with known issues that I can probably solve in a reasonable time frame.

Fred.

0.1.0 is the milestone release, 0.1.1 is the first bug fix release

Solid point. Good thing it's not a democracy or I'd be screwed! I'll cut you a deal involving jabber and pushing/releases :-p

I think it's no surprise I voted warts please. I know many very successful software packages that release completely independent of how a system works. Like Fred noted, if he didn't notice the problem when it was running the Volvo, is it really a bug? I know we all uphold specific standards, but sometimes a field test is the best way to find what really is a problem, and what isn't as much of a problem.

Besides if it's released, then others can either work on new features, or they can help solve bugs, then we'll be well on our way to 0.2. It's easy to make 0.1.1 / ect.

OTHER - release it as 0.99 or something, make your two tweaks, and release that as 0.1.0 - unless you want to get into alpha/beta/gamma/etc. The "release" code is what people download if they want to run their own version on their own volvo.

But my opinion is pretty damned weak on this one. Feel free to piss all over it. Either way, as long as both are out very soon we're good!

I was thinking about this a bit more. I'm tempted to change my vote to bring it up to the highest standards.

With all the talk about checking it into git, I didn't distinguish between an actual release and development increments. I would expect a release to include the compiled firmware and some form of a features list, such that you can upload the firmware, and expect certain things to work in a certain way. If one would like to look at the source, for what ever reason, they can grab the source of the released copy. Sort of like the PDF copy of the schematic for the hardware. They can use the schematic, and if they setup KICAD and supporting software, they can look at the source as well.

I would also expect the development increments wouldn't come with a known good firmware, and it would be expected that you compile it, before use. The development increment, would be done just about any time any work is done that others want to review, or when the developer feels a git commit is a good idea.

Any how, that's how I see the shed.

I have to tidy up some things anyway, but I'll do a fairly minimalistic version. In the mean time my now 14 - 18 month old EEE has finally become unreliable, so I've stripped it down and need to reassemble it to get my data off it... I'll do that tonight, but by the time it's done, I don't expect I'll have much dev time in me. Tomorrow, though, I will be working on it from dawn till dusk, or beyond.

Fred.