[chirp_users] is chirp_next recommended for production use?
I know this project doesn't believe in releases, but pkgsrc currently provides a package with a date as the version. Because chirp-next is labeled next, we are still providing the old codebase, which has not seen an update in a long time.
Should we consider the latest chirp-next to be the releaes of record and provide it to users, vs the latest chirp-daily?
In other words, should a random user who is not paying attention be handed the old chirp-daily (currently 20221217), or yesterday's chirp-next? Which of these is in this not-paying-attention-user's interest, this week? (If it's one now and in the future will be different, that's ok.)
73 de n1dam
I know this project doesn't believe in releases, but pkgsrc currently provides a package with a date as the version.
This project believes in maintaining stability at all times, releasing early and releasing often. Each day there is a change we cut a release and we expect it to be better and more stable than the last, which is why nothing merges without passing tests and without the expectation that the change is usable and an improvement over what is already there.
Because chirp-next is labeled next, we are still providing the old codebase, which has not seen an update in a long time.
Not only has it not seen a release in a long time, but it isn’t supported at all by the developers, and isn’t recommended for anyone unless they have some (regression) reason to use it.
Should we consider the latest chirp-next to be the releaes of record and provide it to users, vs the latest chirp-daily?
I’ll answer that by quoting directly from yesterday’s release email:
Unless you have a reason not to, we recommend using the latest build of CHIRP-next at all times.
And from the download page:
The CHIRP team recommends CHIRP-next unless you experience problems with your radio
And from further down the download page:
It is not advised to use CHIRP-legacy unless you have a specific reason to do so.
In case you missed it, chirp-daily is no more, and chirp-legacy is the last (ever) build of the old codebase.
—-Dan
Dan via chirp_users chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com writes:
Thanks for the quick reply.
I’ll answer that by quoting directly from yesterday’s release email:
Unless you have a reason not to, we recommend using the latest build of CHIRP-next at all times.
And from the download page:
The CHIRP team recommends CHIRP-next unless you experience problems with your radio
And from further down the download page:
It is not advised to use CHIRP-legacy unless you have a specific reason to do so.
I have been just updating from the emails and not looking at the download page. But yes I should have looked harder.
In case you missed it, chirp-daily is no more, and chirp-legacy is the last (ever) build of the old codebase.
I indeed did miss it. My perhaps-faulty memory is that last time I contemplated this question was soon in chirp-next evolution and it wasn't ready to serve to random users yet.
I didn't perceive an announcement of the big shift to "this is now the stable version" on the list -- but that could certainly be my fault for not noticing. To me this is am momentous bit flip.
I will therefore update pkgsrc from daily to next. The package is just called chirp with release number YYYYMMDD, so the daily/next isn't that visible to pkgsrc users.
Not important, but I wonder if next going to remain "next" indefinitely. It sort of implies "this is a beta towards a future release".
Not important, but I wonder if next going to remain "next" indefinitely. It sort of implies "this is a beta towards a future release”.
Originally I said the plan would be to start calling it daily again, but I think it’s probably best to just drop the -next from it and just call it “chirp”. The rough plan is to do that at the end of this year.
I’m surprised you’re still able to build and distribute the components required for the legacy version, since they’re all long out of support on every other distribution. Thus if I were you I’d just call the package of the new stuff “chirp”.
—Dan
It is confusing. Surely we are smart enough to make it intuitive!
KK4JO
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 26, 2023, at 09:30, Dan via chirp_users chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com wrote:
Not important, but I wonder if next going to remain "next" indefinitely. It sort of implies "this is a beta towards a future release”.
Originally I said the plan would be to start calling it daily again, but I think it’s probably best to just drop the -next from it and just call it “chirp”. The rough plan is to do that at the end of this year.
I’m surprised you’re still able to build and distribute the components required for the legacy version, since they’re all long out of support on every other distribution. Thus if I were you I’d just call the package of the new stuff “chirp”.
—Dan _______________________________________________ chirp_users mailing list chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_users This message was sent to Kerry at t2ckerry@gmail.com To unsubscribe, send an email to chirp_users-unsubscribe@intrepid.danplanet.com To report this email as off-topic, please email chirp_users-owner@intrepid.danplanet.com Searchable archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com
I noted early on that when chirp-next was released that it was built with the python3 packages and that since python2 was no longer being updated it was a good idea to move from the chirp legacy release to the newer chirp-next versions.
The download page has for quite some time shown only the chirp-next releases.
Jeff KI7GJG
On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 10:59 AM Kerry Whittle t2ckerry@gmail.com wrote:
It is confusing. Surely we are smart enough to make it intuitive!
KK4JO
Sent from my iPhone
On Aug 26, 2023, at 09:30, Dan via chirp_users <
chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com> wrote:
Not important, but I wonder if next going to remain "next" indefinitely. It sort of implies "this is a beta towards a future release”.
Originally I said the plan would be to start calling it daily again, but
I think it’s probably best to just drop the -next from it and just call it “chirp”. The rough plan is to do that at the end of this year.
I’m surprised you’re still able to build and distribute the components
required for the legacy version, since they’re all long out of support on every other distribution. Thus if I were you I’d just call the package of the new stuff “chirp”.
—Dan _______________________________________________ chirp_users mailing list chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_users This message was sent to Kerry at t2ckerry@gmail.com To unsubscribe, send an email to
chirp_users-unsubscribe@intrepid.danplanet.com
To report this email as off-topic, please email
chirp_users-owner@intrepid.danplanet.com
Searchable archive:
https://www.mail-archive.com/chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com _______________________________________________ chirp_users mailing list chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com http://intrepid.danplanet.com/mailman/listinfo/chirp_users This message was sent to sandhillsinvestment@gmail.com at sandhillsinvestment@gmail.com To unsubscribe, send an email to chirp_users-unsubscribe@intrepid.danplanet.com To report this email as off-topic, please email chirp_users-owner@intrepid.danplanet.com Searchable archive: https://www.mail-archive.com/chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com
The download page has for quite some time shown only the chirp-next releases.
Ever since the official release of CHIRP-next on 1-January-2023, access to the CHIRP-next and CHIRP-legacy downloads have been available on the CHIRP download page.
https://chirp.danplanet.com/projects/chirp/wiki/Download
Jim KC9HI
Dan via chirp_users chirp_users@intrepid.danplanet.com writes:
Not important, but I wonder if next going to remain "next" indefinitely. It sort of implies "this is a beta towards a future release”.
Originally I said the plan would be to start calling it daily again, but I think it’s probably best to just drop the -next from it and just call it “chirp”. The rough plan is to do that at the end of this year.
That sounds great to me.
I’m surprised you’re still able to build and distribute the components required for the legacy version, since they’re all long out of support on every other distribution. Thus if I were you I’d just call the package of the new stuff “chirp”.
Dependencies are ok, albeit obviously on thin ice:
py27-serial>=2.7:../../comms/py-serial py27-future>=0.18.0:../../devel/py-future python27>=2.7.1nb2:../../lang/python27 py27-libxml2>=2.6.27:../../textproc/py-libxml2 py27-gtk2>=2.24.0nb43:../../x11/py-gtk2
Yes, I plan to basically update the chirp package away from the old one to be building the bits in chirp-next, but still called chirp, so I'll be aligned with your 2024 naming and users wil just see chirp.
That's all fine but I wanted to ask rather than assume I knew what's going on, because usually that doesn't go so well!
73 de n1dam
participants (5)
-
Dan -
Greg Troxel -
Jeffrey Vian -
Jim Unroe -
Kerry Whittle