So, I had intended for the patch that I sent with the UI stuff to go in
separately. It's much nicer for the version history if patches and
changesets are small and self-contained. Since the UI stuff is not
exactly small and also not specific to the UV5, I'd prefer it to be
separate.
No problem. Separate it will be.
That being said, I understand if it's harder for you to slice it up at
this point. If you don't want to, and don't mind, I might try to do
that before I apply the patch.
I still have the original patch that you sent me. I would appreciate it if you add it since it is UI stuff? Do you need need me to email it back? I'll take care of of the uv5r part.
> @@ -644,7 +644,7 @@
> return int(version_tag[idx:idx+3])
> raise Exception("Unrecognized firmware version string")
>
> - def _get_settings(self):
> + def get_settings(self):
You reverted one of my changes here, probably because I made it while
you were working on this and it got merged into your patch without you
realizing it. It would be good if you could avoid this, which may just
be a bit of manual tweaking so that the code after your patch looks
like the code before (minus your changes).
The patch was:
http://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/repository/revisions/5f4fff6266ab/diff
Sorry. I don't remember how that came about. But I would be happy change what I have to not affect this.
> + val1a = RadioSettingValueInteger(13600000, 52000000,
I know this isn't what you want to do, but at least it works. Maybe we
should leave it as-is and I can help you make it format like a float
after we get the core functionality into the tree.
I think this great. I would like to get it to look like a float, though. It is really nice to have both VFOs set to a frequency after a programming session.
Otherwise, I think it looks good.
Seriously, what's left to do? When can we start making fun of the folks
that still use the icky OEM software? :)