This is a discussion related to the Copter development priority debate that popped on the Copter-3.3 beta testing thread. A quick categorization of the things we work on in each release include:
- bug fixes (i.e. fixes to existing features that have a defect)
- safety features (i.e. new features that improve reliability)
- other new features (i.e. non safety features like landing gear)
The basic question might be, "are we spending too much time on new features, time that should instead be spent on bug fixes or safety features?". Let the debate continue!
Replies
Yes, the documentation can use more work. I am working on structuring it better, starting with the common documents that appear across planner, copter, rover, plane. BUT there is still an enormous amount to do and I think even as this gets better organised configuration and setup will remain a non-trivial task.
If people have particular areas of expertise or have worked on a document and think they can improve it or make it better organised within the whole documentation set, we welcome your advice (and editorial assistance!)
Hamish, we are sure glad you are here because you're doing a great job at improving the wiki!
I'm getting a hell of a lot of help. Could use even more from you guys on the coal face :-)
I'm ready to help with documentation if I can. Which areas would you need help in ?
Thanks Hugues.
The list of specific issues that have to be dealt with are on github here. One that would be really good to be looked at is Create doc listing all/common ArduPilot error messages. Basically something which would help people understand and address any error message they see on the Mission Planner HUD, including the new EKF warnings.
If there is an issue you think you can address, add a comment requesting that it be assigned to you.
If you don't like that one, any page you see an issue with is "fair game" :-)
Hamish: As I wrote, your work this years is just impressive, not easy to be better; many thank's; but time to time, reading post or instructions, if we have any idea to add or modified instructions, I'm not shure were is the best place to post the idea?
Hi Cala
At the bottom of every pages is this text "Questions about this page? Comments? Suggestions? Post to APM Forum! Use the platform specific to your query, and make sure to include the name of the page you are referring to."
If you know you're seeing an error, another good place to post is github here.
Thanks very much for your kind words
Cheers
H
Many thank's
My thanks to those developers who do a great job.
it is factual and correct for a beginner it is very hard to set up a perfect Pixhawk an APM.
A mistake of believing you could with 4 or 6 a copter adjust perfectly slider in the software.
We are engaged for about 10 years with Multikopter have a lot of time and money lost to the copter flew flawlessly.
The APM platform provides in my opinion one of the best and at the correct setting an unsurpassable end system that is DJI and Mikrokopter superior, and at an unbeatable price.
We have sold more than 50 of such APM systems to our customers and no problems.
When set correctly, there is no problem, but as I read load some beginners betas on their fc and are very overwhelmed.
the focus should be on reliability. and in the simple instructions Wicki which are understood even by beginners.
My Englich is very bad.
Hi! Bug fixes should be a priority. There are a lot of APM 2.5 and above users that are now left with the buggy software having no choice but to buy the expensive pixhawk. I know I won't. A lot of us use APM just for the sake of failsafe capability. I like the autotune but there is no way to tune yaw in 3.2.1 which, in my opinion, may be the most important part for having a good video platform. Please continue supporting older platforms or, at least, fix them properly.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
-
5
of 20 Next