From: Charles R. <rey...@pe...> - 2009-01-21 17:28:47
|
What is the relation between Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008) Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009) Are both of these compatible with player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009) Charles ________________________________________ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com |
From: Charles R. <rey...@pe...> - 2009-01-27 17:11:58
|
<HEAD> <STYLE>body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color: #ffffff;color: black;}</STYLE> <META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16788" name=GENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY id=compText> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid"> <DIV class=gmail_quote> <BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid"> <DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>I'd like to repeat and elaborate a previous quesiton</DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c> </DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>>>>> What is the relation between<BR>>>>> Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008)<BR>>>>> Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009)<BR>>>>><BR>>>>> Are both of these compatible with<BR>>>>> player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009)<BR></DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>Why was Stage-2.1.1 released six months after Stage-3.0.1? </DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>What is the relation, why would I want to use Stage-2.1.1 instead of Stage-3.0.1?</DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c> </DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>The documentation for Stage-2 and Stafe-3 are both at <A href="http://playerstage.sourceforge.net">http://playerstage.sourceforge.net</A></DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>The Release page for Stage-3 says that it is a major enhancement of Stage-2, </DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>with signficant fixes, but that not everything from Stage-2 was included in Stage-3.</DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c> <DIV class=Wj3C7c>Why was Stage-2.1.1 released six months after Stage-3.0.1? </DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c> </DIV></DIV> <DIV class=Wj3C7c> </DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY><pre> ________________________________________ PeoplePC Online A better way to Internet http://www.peoplepc.com</pre> |
From: Kevin B. <ba...@gm...> - 2009-02-02 16:44:33
|
Stage 3.0 is a very different product from Stage 2.1. Bug fixes are still applied to Stage 2.1 as many people still rely on it. Stage 3 has some fancier features (2.5d, new GUI) Stage 2.1 has some features Stage 3 lacks (I don't know offhand what is missing). I use Stage 2.1 simply because I have not had time to look into/migrate my lab to Stage 3. On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Charles Reynolds <rey...@pe...> wrote: >> I'd like to repeat and elaborate a previous quesiton >> >> >>>> What is the relation between >> >>>> Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008) >> >>>> Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009) >> >>>> >> >>>> Are both of these compatible with >> >>>> player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009) >> Why was Stage-2.1.1 released six months after Stage-3.0.1? >> What is the relation, why would I want to use Stage-2.1.1 instead of >> Stage-3.0.1? >> >> The documentation for Stage-2 and Stafe-3 are both at >> http://playerstage.sourceforge.net >> The Release page for Stage-3 says that it is a major enhancement of >> Stage-2, >> with signficant fixes, but that not everything from Stage-2 was included >> in Stage-3. >> Why was Stage-2.1.1 released six months after Stage-3.0.1? >> >> > > ________________________________________ > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-users mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > > |
From: Toby C. <tco...@pl...> - 2009-01-21 18:20:49
|
At the moment to the best of my knowledge stage 3/2.1/trunk(future 3.1) and player 2.1/trunk(future 2.2) are all source compatible with each other. Toby 2009/1/22 Charles Reynolds <rey...@pe...> > What is the relation between > Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008) > Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009) > > Are both of these compatible with > player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009) > > Charles > > > ________________________________________ > PeoplePC Online > A better way to Internet > http://www.peoplepc.com > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-users mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > -- This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged and/or confidential information |
From: Paul O. <new...@ki...> - 2009-01-21 20:33:46
|
If nothing interrupt me, tomorrow I'll check if recent Stage-2.1 is able to work with tomorrows Player 2.2 (trunk) snapshot. I wonder if Stage-2.1 really need to be refactored to fit new MainSetup()/MainQuit() infrastructure. Paul On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Toby Collett wrote: > At the moment to the best of my knowledge stage 3/2.1/trunk(future 3.1) and > player 2.1/trunk(future 2.2) are all source compatible with each other. > > Toby > > 2009/1/22 Charles Reynolds <rey...@pe...> > >> What is the relation between >> Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008) >> Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009) >> >> Are both of these compatible with >> player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009) >> >> Charles >> >> >> ________________________________________ >> PeoplePC Online >> A better way to Internet >> http://www.peoplepc.com >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: >> SourcForge Community >> SourceForge wants to tell your story. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword >> _______________________________________________ >> Playerstage-users mailing list >> Pla...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users >> > > > > -- > This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged > and/or confidential information > |
From: Toby C. <tco...@pl...> - 2009-01-21 21:06:28
|
Stage is not a threaded driver so is not impacted by the recent changes (in theory :) Would be good if you could confirm they actually run together though. Toby 2009/1/22 Paul Osmialowski <new...@ki...> > If nothing interrupt me, tomorrow I'll check if recent Stage-2.1 is able > to work with tomorrows Player 2.2 (trunk) snapshot. I wonder if Stage-2.1 > really need to be refactored to fit new MainSetup()/MainQuit() > infrastructure. > Paul > > On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Toby Collett wrote: > > > At the moment to the best of my knowledge stage 3/2.1/trunk(future 3.1) > and > > player 2.1/trunk(future 2.2) are all source compatible with each other. > > > > Toby > > > > 2009/1/22 Charles Reynolds <rey...@pe...> > > > >> What is the relation between > >> Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008) > >> Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009) > >> > >> Are both of these compatible with > >> player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009) > >> > >> Charles > >> > >> > >> ________________________________________ > >> PeoplePC Online > >> A better way to Internet > >> http://www.peoplepc.com > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: > >> SourcForge Community > >> SourceForge wants to tell your story. > >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Playerstage-users mailing list > >> Pla...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged > > and/or confidential information > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-users mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > -- This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged and/or confidential information |
From: Paul O. <new...@ki...> - 2009-01-22 13:51:36
|
Hello Toby, I can confirm there's no problem with using todays snapshot of Player-2.2 with todays snapshot of Stage-2.1. However this does not mean that there's not a problem at all. Although Stage part is fine, some things were broken in Player itself while upgrading to the new ThreadedDriver infrastructure. - there are still many drivers with Shutdown() method - wavefront driver is missing 'return 0' at the end of MainSetup() method, this breaks whole driver as for unknown reason, it behaves as it was returning 1. I suspect there are more drivers with MainSetup() method not returning explicit value, as it was easy to omit this during massive upgrade. - if I understood right, all Request() calls in wavefront driver should have 'threaded' parameter set to 'true', as MainSetup() method now is called when driver thread is running (I guess it is called from driver thread instead of Player main tread) - still (even after above changes) playernav does not work properly (there are problems with updating map and if for some good luck wavefront finally causes robot to go to the target there is problem with shwoing planned path and updating robot position) Stage produces these warnings, I guess something should be done with them: - no startup function registered (TODO: remove this warning before release) (model.c stg_model_startup) - no shutdown function registered (TODO: remove this warning before release) (model.c stg_model_shutdown) Cheers, Paul On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Toby Collett wrote: > Stage is not a threaded driver so is not impacted by the recent changes (in > theory :) > Would be good if you could confirm they actually run together though. > > Toby > > 2009/1/22 Paul Osmialowski <new...@ki...> > >> If nothing interrupt me, tomorrow I'll check if recent Stage-2.1 is able >> to work with tomorrows Player 2.2 (trunk) snapshot. I wonder if Stage-2.1 >> really need to be refactored to fit new MainSetup()/MainQuit() >> infrastructure. >> Paul >> >> On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Toby Collett wrote: >> >>> At the moment to the best of my knowledge stage 3/2.1/trunk(future 3.1) >> and >>> player 2.1/trunk(future 2.2) are all source compatible with each other. >>> >>> Toby >>> >>> 2009/1/22 Charles Reynolds <rey...@pe...> >>> >>>> What is the relation between >>>> Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008) >>>> Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009) >>>> >>>> Are both of these compatible with >>>> player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009) >>>> >>>> Charles >>>> >>>> >>>> ________________________________________ >>>> PeoplePC Online >>>> A better way to Internet >>>> http://www.peoplepc.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: >>>> SourcForge Community >>>> SourceForge wants to tell your story. >>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Playerstage-users mailing list >>>> Pla...@li... >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged >>> and/or confidential information >>> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: >> SourcForge Community >> SourceForge wants to tell your story. >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword >> _______________________________________________ >> Playerstage-users mailing list >> Pla...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users >> > > > > -- > This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged > and/or confidential information > |
From: Toby C. <tco...@pl...> - 2009-01-24 23:12:47
|
Most of the problems below should be fixed now. Not sure why playernav is not working, have not used it much myself. I am pretty sure the stage warnings are harmless... Toby 2009/1/23 Paul Osmialowski <new...@ki...> > Hello Toby, > > I can confirm there's no problem with using todays snapshot of Player-2.2 > with todays snapshot of Stage-2.1. However this does not mean that there's > not a problem at all. Although Stage part is fine, some things were broken > in Player itself while upgrading to the new ThreadedDriver infrastructure. > - there are still many drivers with Shutdown() method > - wavefront driver is missing 'return 0' at the end of MainSetup() method, > this breaks whole driver as for unknown reason, it behaves as it was > returning 1. I suspect there are more drivers with MainSetup() method not > returning explicit value, as it was easy to omit this during massive > upgrade. > - if I understood right, all Request() calls in wavefront driver should > have 'threaded' parameter set to 'true', as MainSetup() method now is > called when driver thread is running (I guess it is called from driver > thread instead of Player main tread) > - still (even after above changes) playernav does not work properly (there > are problems with updating map and if for some good luck wavefront > finally causes robot to go to the target there is problem with shwoing > planned path and updating robot position) > > Stage produces these warnings, I guess something should be done with them: > - no startup function registered (TODO: remove this warning before > release) (model.c stg_model_startup) > - no shutdown function registered (TODO: remove this warning before > release) (model.c stg_model_shutdown) > > Cheers, > Paul > > On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Toby Collett wrote: > > > Stage is not a threaded driver so is not impacted by the recent changes > (in > > theory :) > > Would be good if you could confirm they actually run together though. > > > > Toby > > > > 2009/1/22 Paul Osmialowski <new...@ki...> > > > >> If nothing interrupt me, tomorrow I'll check if recent Stage-2.1 is able > >> to work with tomorrows Player 2.2 (trunk) snapshot. I wonder if > Stage-2.1 > >> really need to be refactored to fit new MainSetup()/MainQuit() > >> infrastructure. > >> Paul > >> > >> On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Toby Collett wrote: > >> > >>> At the moment to the best of my knowledge stage 3/2.1/trunk(future 3.1) > >> and > >>> player 2.1/trunk(future 2.2) are all source compatible with each other. > >>> > >>> Toby > >>> > >>> 2009/1/22 Charles Reynolds <rey...@pe...> > >>> > >>>> What is the relation between > >>>> Stage-3.0.1 (released 7/29/2008) > >>>> Stage-2.1.1 (released 1/16/2009) > >>>> > >>>> Are both of these compatible with > >>>> player-2.1.2 (released 1/15/2009) > >>>> > >>>> Charles > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ________________________________________ > >>>> PeoplePC Online > >>>> A better way to Internet > >>>> http://www.peoplepc.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> This SF.net email is sponsored by: > >>>> SourcForge Community > >>>> SourceForge wants to tell your story. > >>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> Playerstage-users mailing list > >>>> Pla...@li... > >>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain > privileged > >>> and/or confidential information > >>> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> This SF.net email is sponsored by: > >> SourcForge Community > >> SourceForge wants to tell your story. > >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Playerstage-users mailing list > >> Pla...@li... > >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged > > and/or confidential information > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > This SF.net email is sponsored by: > SourcForge Community > SourceForge wants to tell your story. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword > _______________________________________________ > Playerstage-users mailing list > Pla...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/playerstage-users > -- This email is intended for the addressee only and may contain privileged and/or confidential information |