LEDE Instructionset <--- Is this the right naming for this field? @jow called it "Package arch"
IMHO it is better Package arch/architecture, as that is more an architecture thing, also "architecture" is more well-known.
"instructionset" is just some of the features of an architecture/ISA. 32bit or 64bit are instructionsets of x86 architecture for example.
EDIT: but it is also true that tere are quite a bit "package architectures" that are the same actual achitecture with different instruction sets enabled (like say NEON or VFP)
Thanks for your feedback. The "instructionset" was a leftover from the OpenWrt wiki.
Changed it now to "Package architecture"; dataentries + datatables updated accordingly.
How do we express the current LEDE support status?
Available dropdown values (made up by me): "-, 16.12, 17.06, 17.12, snapshot"
Could also be "Pre-Release" or something like that.
Anything will be better than the current status, i.e. nothing shown in the dataentries.
[quote="tmomas, post:31, topic:48, full:true"]
Regarding dropdown "LEDE Supported Current Rel"
How do we express the current LEDE support status?[/quote]I'd rename it to "last supported release", and use it to show the last release LEDE has for the device.
For most devices it will have to be mass-edited each LEDE release to change the number, discontinued devices will keep the last LEDE version supporting that device.
I think this is how OpenWRT field with the same name was supposed to work.
[quote="tmomas, post:33, topic:48, full:true"] Regarding field "LEDE Unsupported"
As a first shot, can I set 'LEDE Unsupported=OpenWrt Unsupported' ?
[/quote]yeah, it seems to list unsupported hardware of the device, it's likely the same.
Silly me: I declared some styles too generally. Making them more specific solved this problem, and besides that, also the problem of the edit summary extending into the "Minor edit" checkbox.
In the Next router? ath10k or mwlwifi based? something else? thread, @hnyman noticed that there's no entry in the LEDE ToH for the Netgear R7800, despite the fact that there's a nice juicy build for it in LEDE. (I didn't see it in the OpenWrt ToH, either.)
As we approach a final ToH, we need to find a way to ensure that the set of router detail/dataentry pages matches the actual set of binaries.
[quote="richb-hanover, post:36, topic:48"] @hnyman noticed that there's no entry in the LEDE ToH for the Netgear R7800, despite the fact that there's a nice juicy build for it in LEDE. (I didn't see it in the OpenWrt ToH, either.)
[/quote]And that is the reason why it is not in LEDE ToH, either. The device it not supported by Openwrt, as it has been added later, only for LEDE.
As long as all device data here is deleted regularly and "master data" is imported from Openwrt, the device will not exist here. I have created R7800 twice here, so far, but it has been deleted since then. I can create that device again, after the final import has been done and it won't get deleted any more.
I do not think that there is any perfect way to automatically check for devices to be added and devices to be removed. Using e.g. snapshot download dirs as the reference point is risky as that would make the last buildbot run as the reference point. And there are deviations between build runs (due to new errors breaking a device etc.)
But there could be a script comparing/listing the contents of the snapshot download dirs for firmwares. Only the changes to the previous similar list would need to be checked. But that will require some manual checking in any case.
I think that removal needs always human eyes for checking.
The same for adding, as a device may just be a country variant of an existing one. Or something like that.
Oh dear... I know @tmomas has been experimenting with the best way to import the OpenWrt data with the best formatting possible. Sorry that your R7800 data got overwritten by subsequent imports.
My intent with this "to do" item was to remind ourselves that the OpenWrt data is not complete, and find a way to add in new devices that are LEDE-only. Perhaps (once we do the final import) we can have an announcement to solicit the LEDE-only devices be added. That would be your cue that it's safe to add (for one final time) info about the R7800. Thanks.
[quote="hnyman, post:37, topic:48, full:true"]I do not think that there is any perfect way to automatically check for devices to be added and devices to be removed.[/quote]GIthub allows to use wget to download only makefiles (or any other file in the source, as long as you have it's folder tree), you can then parse them with a script if needed.
I'm using that for my ToP script to read CATEGORY and SUBMENU entries that are of course missing from package lists.
That's simply due to very little threads exists in the LEDE forum currently, and the column would be 99% empty.
In the dataentries, the field "LEDE Forum Topic URL" already exists. We (you?:)) can add it to the datatables any time we like.
[quote="tmomas, post:45, topic:48, full:true"]Would "Bluetooth" as a new field be of any interest?[/quote]Theoretically (for the future) yes, but I don't think there is more than a hand-few devices in the ToH with Bluetooth at the moment.