Go to Post Now please, go have some meaningful discussions that will inspire us all. - Ken Leung [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 06-12-2006, 02:04
eugenebrooks eugenebrooks is offline
Team Role: Engineer
AKA: Dr. Brooks
no team (WRRF)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 601
eugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ethics 101: To re-use or not to re-use?

<R71> Unaltered software modules developed during prior competitions may not be directly re-used. Just as designs for hardware COMPONENTS may be reused from one year to the next, software algorithms and designs may be reused. However, the specific lines of code must be customized for each robot each year.

The plain English of R71 is clear. It disallows the reuse of unaltered software modules, allows the reuse of software algorithms and designs, and requires that modules be customized for the robot each year. The rule was clear and easy to satisfy, hence no Q&A activity regarding it.

The business of retyping code developed outside of the allowed work periods in order to make it legal is a red herring from a prior season. It did not apply this past season, probably because more than one person saw teams busily retyping their entire robot program in order to legalize it in a prior season, while the "illegal copy" ran the robot during practice matches, and realized the foolishness of this rule. Retyping modules, verbatim, did not satisfy the plain English of R71.

Sharing is one of the key principles of the FIRST community. Sharing has been encouraged and has been expressed in many ways: design ideas, actual parts, actual software, etc..., have all been shared. From the point of view of the FIRST community, there is everything to gain and nothing to lose by sharing at any level that you are comfortable with. If someone walked up to me at a competition and asked for a copy of the source code for our robot I would hand it to them without a second thought. I would like to think that the recipient would learn something from it. The same goes for any of the mechanical aspects and wiring aspects of our robot, in any level of detail. I would encourage every team to share at any level of detail that they are comfortable with as nothing but good can come of it.

I am not one to think, however, that we should have rules that force sharing. Forcing sharing is as much an anathema to FIRST principles as is the notion of seeing a robot covered by a black shroud to conceal "trade secrets" while it is in the pits. There are so many teams eager to share that we need not make teams uncomfortable by forcing sharing upon them.

If the past experience is our guide, the rules for software development will change again this year. The notion of treating the software like hardware misses some of the fundamental aspects of software development. Suppose we were to place the same "customize modules" requirement on CNC software used to turn out identical parts that are used in a team's robot year to year. Just what purpose would customizing the CNC program have, only to have it turn out exactly the same part. A module that implements interrupt driven wheel counters is exactly the same. The end result is the count, no more or less than that. The role of customization here is exactly the same as a rule of customization for the CNC program that turns out exactly the same axle as last year.

I would hope that the rules for software development get changed so that they reflect the nature of the software development process. There isn't any need to customize a software module that provides wheel counters, and that the program for the robot will be customized given that each game is entirely new, is a given. Lacking that, it is best to follow a reasonable interpretation of whatever the rules may turn out to be.

Eugene

Last edited by eugenebrooks : 06-12-2006 at 02:18.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Robot Ethics? negfrequency General Forum 33 01-06-2006 18:55
Does anyone else NOT use a long arm to place a tetra on top of the Goal? mad_cloversc General Forum 29 08-03-2005 00:44
Accelerometer Use Doug G Programming 2 15-12-2004 09:06
can we use? Allie Kit & Additional Hardware 5 13-02-2002 15:54


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:26.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi