Arduino IDE boards.txt file and instructions about arduboy HOT 29 CLOSED

Yes. At the very least let's set the board option. The other two options may be needed later.

from arduboy.

https://github.com/yyyc514/hardware_arduboy

I removed the speeds and just added devkit and production. About to go fix my PR to work with this. I think Arduboy should fork this repository and maintain this.

from arduboy.

from arduboy.

We still need to make sure the boot fuses are current (if someone every wired up the ISCP ports). Although right now I'm getting a warning that it can't even find the boot loader (it's looking locally not in the Arduino source), so maybe that's not a huge issue?

Can someone else test this?

from arduboy.

Or we could call it "Kickstarter Edition" or any number of other cute things.

from arduboy.

We probably want to get on this list:

https://github.com/arduino/Arduino/wiki/Unofficial-list-of-3rd-party-boards-support-urls#list-of-3rd-party-boards-support-urls

We can publish a JSON file so someone just types the URL into the Arduino IDE and then it does the actual download the the boards file including keeping it up the date. Worth pursueing?

from arduboy.

Yes, I would say say this is worth keeping as an active issue. Anything that we can do on this end to create a better user experience is going to be a win. I do not have the ability to test this at the moment. @bateske ?

from arduboy.

I've built for both devkit and production now using the IDE - seems to work great.

from arduboy.

Yikes. https://adafruit.github.io/arduino-board-index/package_adafruit_index.json

That is one hell of a JSON payload (and of course ours would have fewer boards), but not impossible.

from arduboy.

Should we clone this if we agree it has value and include it in the 1.0 release notes?

from arduboy.

Yes

from arduboy.

Please fork then, and we can maintain here.

from arduboy.

Alright, I simply don't have a production unit to test on. Opinions? Push this back to a 1.x milestone?

from arduboy.

A haven't looked into the details of what's being discussed here, but whatever SparkFun does for their boards works well for me. The details in their README.md make it quite easy for the user.

from arduboy.

It works on production and devkit. I've tested both.

from arduboy.

Yeah the readme and such things could probably be refined. I just wanted to get the core experience working and leave enough for someone who can follow instructions to get started.

If we want to polish it up a lot more that's fine by me. I never cared to really own this, just at the time no one else seemed interested in a proper boards file.

from arduboy.

I went ahead and tagged 1.0 since all the PR related blockers are cleared, but this is really pretty important for someone testing their work on both production and the devkit. Lets fork this and update the docs if need be... is there really anyone against that course of action?

from arduboy.

Yeah, I don't want to include this feature if it hasn't been fully tested. I do own this thing, as I have a dev kit. I might expedite myself a production unit tomorrow and get the production testing by another set of eyes done.

from arduboy.

It seems wise for you to have a production kit if you're the person in charge of items like these. I'm not sure what "include" here means though... does it mean "Arduboy" can't ever have any experimental repositories? That seems needlessly restrictive. shrugs

Just wanting this off my plate and feeling like once it's in Arduboy someone else can take care of it. Source code is far more interesting than board files.

from arduboy.

I pushed to get you a production unit ASAP after the first few were ready. I did not push to get myself one. Now there is stock available again and I will have have a unit. 💯

from arduboy.

Well, thanks.

from arduboy.

I'll have a "production" unit equivalent once I rewire my home made version. I then won't have a "DevKit" equivalent any more, though. 😉

from arduboy.

This needs to happen. It really really bugs me reading the readme that people have to pick Leonardo when I did this work like 6 months ago.

from arduboy.

It's more of a problem that you can't chose between a production or DevKit unit, to automatically set the proper _#define_s for the library.

from arduboy.

Right. That is the other big win. Thought defaulting to produciton was no doubt the right choose for a lot of new users receiving their units just now.

from arduboy.

It really really bugs me reading the readme that people have to pick Leonardo when I did this work like 6 months ago.

It bugs me that the production Arduboy comes with the Leonardo bootloader and thus the Leonardo USB IDs. It should have had its own USB IDs. I doubt the Arduino people would be very happy about this, either.

from arduboy.

Well, it's not possible to fix that now, but it is possible to fix getting this out there for the world to benefit. :-)

from arduboy.

It bugs me that the production Arduboy comes with the Leonardo bootloader and thus the Leonardo USB IDs. It should have had its own USB IDs. I doubt the Arduino people would be very happy about this, either.

I have about the same feeling, but it something we on the development end don't have control over.

from arduboy.

Arduboy hardware target added https://github.com/Arduboy/arduboy.github.io/tree/master/board-support

from arduboy.