* Rudolf Usselmann (rudi at asics.ws) wrote:

these people were whitelisted sometime in the past. till now i never
moderated stuff that went to the list based on content, just that it was not
spam. well after two years you're probably right that this grew from valid
question to spam...

so from now on, every MP3 'me too' like in this thread will be rejected with a
message explaining why (i will also remove people from whitelist if they
continue with this 'me too'). if it woun't help i will start blacklisting.

does anyone disagree ?

best regards,
p.

a constructive way to solve this (for anyone interested in it) is to make a project and upload code to the cvs. (it seams it will be very popular project). if need be we can create a seperate mailing list for all the MP3 fans... best regards, p. * Matjaz Breskvar (phoenix at opencores.org) wrote:

Matjaz Breskvar wrote:



Actually there are two MP3 decoder projects and one even has files for
download. I think the "me too" emails show the ignorance of those people
to even try to find something on the open cores page.

That brings me to some thoughts I have bee pondering about recently. It
is in a way a jump of thought, but it also has to do with it, in the way
of how many people are there to contribute to this community and how
many are only taking advantage of it.

I guess the logic development cannot be compared with the software
development, but I was just wondering when looking how vibrant
sourceforge is, what makes it that way and what can be done to get open
cores in that direction too?

One simple difference is the amount of people starting projects on
sourceforge, but maybe there is a way of adding features to open cores
that would attract more people to start and also finish projects?

I think finishing a project is quite different between software and
logic projects. The software is never finished, but everybody uses it
already, it just reaches a certain version with certain features. With
the logic there is a defined state where you put the stamp "done" to it.
Mostly only then it really can be used.

But then there seems to be a difference between open cores and
sourceforge and that is in the amount of projects that get started but
never make it over the planning state. Maybe I am wrong and sourceforge
has that too?


Regards,

Guenter

* G?nter Dannoritzer (dannoritzer at web.de) wrote:

i looked at both MP3 projects and on there page it's indicated there are no
files in cvs, though from other stuff on the page it may be deduced that
there are. so if maintainers would like too fix that...

regards,
p.

Matjaz Breskvar wrote:



When you follow the "Downloads" link on the top right you will find the
files.

That is a bit tricky, as there are two ways to offer files through open
cores. One is to import the code to cvs, then you will get automatically
a link under the "Downloads" link.

The other way is to upload the code, then it never appears in cvs.

You will find several projects that don't have a cvs repository, but you
can download code.

Regards,

Guenter

On Thu, 2005-06-30 at 16:38 +0200, Günter Dannoritzer wrote:
Guenter, I think there are two main differences between HW IP Cores and software: 1) it's much easier (well, I mean the development process) to write and "try" software. All you do is compile it and run it. If you like it you keep it ... With hardware, you need dedicated tools, development boards, etc. It's a much more closed community. Just because I have a PC, I can not try out an HW IP Core. The investment, financial and time-wise is much larger. 2) Probably somewhat relates to #1 above, the software community is much, much larger than the HW one. Look at home many members sourceforge has, and compare it to the number of *users* of opencores. I think software went through similar growing pains in the early days ... I remember bulletin boards enforcing a download/upload ratio ... now of course a thing of the past. I too would like to see more contributors, and less of the "email me the code" garbage ... if this would be my board I would black list those people ... ;*) Best Regards, rudi ============================================================= Rudolf Usselmann, ASICS World Services, http://www.asics.ws Your Partner for IP Cores, Design, Verification and Synthesis ****** Certified USB 2.0 HS OTG and HS Device IP Cores ******

Rudolf Usselmann wrote:

Somewhat related to 2) is the fact that "tinkering" with hardware for your own enjoyment is an expensive and time-consuming process - even more-so with limited resources such as debug/analysis equipment - as compared to software. As a result, most of the hardware work being done is, I suspect, of a commercial nature, and only a small proportion of that work is permitted to be released back into the public domain by the owners of the IP. I guess it's a catch-22 - there's not much around so what is developed is more jealously guarded?!? I think with the proliferation of cheaper and more powerful (larger) FPGAs and more dev/eval kits and more advanced programming tools together with a trickle of additional open IP it is something that (only) time will mend - but it'll get there in the end. Regards, -- Mark McDougall, Software Engineer Virtual Logic Pty Ltd, http://www.vl.com.au> 21-25 King St, Rockdale, 2216 Ph: +612-9599-3255 Fax: +612-9599-3266

Does anyone know if there is free GFP_T/GFP_F, LAPS, POS IP core Available. -----Original Message----- From: cores-bounces at opencores.org [mailto:cores-bounces at opencores.org] On Behalf Of Mark McDougall Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 5:29 PM To: Discussion list about free open source IP cores Subject: Re: warning [Was: Re: [oc] MP3 Decoder in VHDL] Rudolf Usselmann wrote: Somewhat related to 2) is the fact that "tinkering" with hardware for your own enjoyment is an expensive and time-consuming process - even more-so with limited resources such as debug/analysis equipment - as compared to software. As a result, most of the hardware work being done is, I suspect, of a commercial nature, and only a small proportion of that work is permitted to be released back into the public domain by the owners of the IP. I guess it's a catch-22 - there's not much around so what is developed is more jealously guarded?!? I think with the proliferation of cheaper and more powerful (larger) FPGAs and more dev/eval kits and more advanced programming tools together with a trickle of additional open IP it is something that (only) time will mend - but it'll get there in the end. Regards, -- Mark McDougall, Software Engineer Virtual Logic Pty Ltd, http://www.vl.com.au> 21-25 King St, Rockdale, 2216 Ph: +612-9599-3255 Fax: +612-9599-3266 _______________________________________________ http://www.opencores.org/mailman/listinfo/cores

On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 04:38:33PM +0200, Günter Dannoritzer wrote:


At the moment it seems as if all projects are content with existing solely
in CVS. This is great for developing but as a user I would really like to
download a release of the project instead of having to download the latest
CVS version. I have a feeling that the load on the opencores server could
be easened if we didn't have to use CVS all the time to download releases.
(Even worse, CVS through a webgui in most cases.)

This would ease bug tracking as well since it is easy for the user to
report that she has downloaded version 0.4 of a certain version instead
of a certain CVS release.

Mirroring of opencores would be easier as well since we could mirror the
release files.

At a glance, a lot of projects are marked as "DONE" on the project page. All
of these should easily be able to produce a release file IMO.

/Andreas

Creating a release can already be done today, it is just a matter of tagging the files in the cvs by maintainer with a specific release tag (maintainer has to come up with the name which can be anything really). And then make the link on the web page to the cvsget with the release tag. As simple as that. However true most maintainers don't create releases. It would be possible for the site to automatically create releases, but I'm not sure what would trigger that. I don't think automatic releases done periodically makes sense, for example every 1st day of the month to make a new release? regards, Damjan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andreas Ehliar" ehliar at lysator.liu.se> To: cores at opencores.org> Sent: Friday, July 08, 2005 4:46 PM Subject: Re: warning [Was: Re: [oc] MP3 Decoder in VHDL]