**FIRST EMAIL**/Invitation to Beta test the New Control System

[Madison]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

FIRST is having teams selected sign a Non-disclosure agreement, which has the ability to limit the flow of information from beta teams to the public. Be aware that even if a beta team wants to tell you something they may be legally bound not to.

I understand that, at some level, having some access to the system at all early is a good thing, but the notion of limiting the information that's made available to other teams is completely absurd and seems counter intuitive to the criteria team applications were judged upon.

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by M. Krass

I understand that, at some level, having some access to the system at all early is a good thing, but the notion of limiting the information that's made available to other teams is completely absurd and seems counter intuitive to the criteria team applications were judged upon.

Possibly, but l will play devils advocate for a second. I am team X who is in the beta test and we hit a snag when downloading our labview code to the crio. Immediately we go to our blog and post about the error. Team Y from another state who is not in the beta test reads this and gets really panicked, and then they come post it on delphi and now there is a rumor that the crio has problems when you download code to it. When in actuality the team had the wrong port setting setup in labview and everything was fine. Having an intermediary such as FIRST or NI before info hits the public will be good in this situation.

Now one could say that if it hit the public someone might be able to quickly fix the problem. But as the complexity of the task increases it will be hit or miss if the problems can be solved.

From reading posts over the past year or so since the new control system was announced I have come to realized that people are very nervous about it and the last thing we need at this point is a mob mentality spreading rumors.

[rwood359]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

From reading posts over the past year or so since the new control system was announced I have come to realized that people are very nervous about it and the last thing we need at this point is a mob mentality spreading rumors.

I don't believe that the non-beta teams need access to the daily trials and tribulations of the beta teams, however I do believe that the remaining teams should have access to the technical documentation that is being given to the beta teams. If need be, include a disclaimer that the documentation is beta and may or may not reflect the final documents.

[B.Johnston]

Originally Posted by rwood359

I don't believe that the non-beta teams need access to the daily trials and tribulations of the beta teams, however I do believe that the remaining teams should have access to the technical documentation that is being given to the beta teams. If need be, include a disclaimer that the documentation is beta and may or may not reflect the final documents.

Here I would respectfully disagree with you.

In 20 some years in the field of technology based controls I have seldom learned much when every thing went right.

The best education came from experiencing the "trials and tribulations" involved in developing new knowlege and understanding.

Not that we need to see the semi-hysteria surrounding the bane bots transmission failures again, we did however, see some valid growth in how to tackle a serious problem from within the first community.

My vote is for the conservative publication of all development issues so that next january we'll have some idea of just what the questions are.

If history is an indicator, we'll always have someone who inadvertently repeats the errors of the past, but learns from it.

P.S. I'd like to just see the thing up close.

[rwood359]

Originally Posted by 1680Bruce

Here I would respectfully disagree with you.

In 20 some years in the field of technology based controls I have seldom learned much when every thing went right.

The best education came from experiencing the "trials and tribulations" involved in developing new knowlege and understanding.

Not that we need to see the semi-hysteria surrounding the bane bots transmission failures again, we did however, see some valid growth in how to tackle a serious problem from within the first community.

My vote is for the conservative publication of all development issues so that next january we'll have some idea of just what the questions are.

If history is an indicator, we'll always have someone who inadvertently repeats the errors of the past, but learns from it.

P.S. I'd like to just see the thing up close.

I don't disagree with you.

The requirement of openness in the announcement and the NDA warnings seem at odds. This is only my first month mentoring, so I haven't seen the reported panics that mis/partial information have caused.

It's part pure curiosity and part self-preservation (a ton of new information and kickoff coming like a runaway train). My real concern is getting the technical documentation.

What does WPILib contain?
How do we interact with the I/O?
Is there a timed control loop?
Is it multi-threaded/multi-tasked?
What Wind River tools are we going to have?
What features will be in the FIRST specific LV that is being supplied?

If we at least know the structure of the default program and the abilities of the underlying system, we can start to consider approaches.

I realize that the beta program is probably a check of the documentation as much as of the hardware. The announcement said that shipments of the systems would start on Sept. 15th. so if it is going to be a serial process of release to the beta teams, update, and then release the remaining teams, the non-beta teams are probably not going to see the documents for 8-12 weeks.

The first rev of technical documents are usually full of ambiguities that the writers and the people close to the project don't see because the resolution is obvious to them. I would like to see all of the documentation available and a forum where we can start commenting and asking questions as soon as possible.

[BornaE]

Notice that the Beta teams are supposed to sign a Disclosure agreement, so they will release all their findings when authorized by FIRST. I am sure FIRST has a well thought plan to release the information.

Rumors wont do anything other than hurting the integrity of the community.

Here is a great example.
All most of the people on here know is that team are supposed to sign an NDA. and everyone is arguing about it. while they have no idea what it is actually about. and we don't even know weather FIRST plans to release the documents to everyone or not.

So just hold your breaths for a couple of weeks till we have more information and don't judge FIRST's or the Beta Testers Plans with the limited information available as of now.

Thank You

ps. We are as eager to spread accurate info as soon as possible as you are to get the info.

[rwood359]

Originally Posted by 0705920

Notice that the Beta teams are supposed to sign a Disclosure agreement, so they will release all their findings when authorized by FIRST. I am sure FIRST has a well thought plan to release the information.

Rumors wont do anything other than hurting the integrity of the community.

Here is a great example.
All most of the people on here know is that team are supposed to sign an NDA. and everyone is arguing about it. while they have no idea what it is actually about. and we don't even know weather FIRST plans to release the documents to everyone or not.

So just hold your breaths for a couple of weeks and don't judge FIRST's or the Beta Testers Plans with the limited information.

Thank You

ps. We are as eager to spread accurate info as soon as possible as you are to get the info.

In truth, a voice of reason. I'll keep quiet and see what is forthcoming.

ps. I grew up in your area. I graduated from Meas High in 1962 and ASU in 1967. If it's OK, I'll PM you next time I'm going to be there visiting my family. I'd like to see your operation.

[ericand]

I asked about when and what we get to share as soon as I got the notice that we were in the Beta program and I saw the NDA.

The response I got back was that the timeline and parameters will be listed on the Beta Team web site, which we will get access to once we complete the registration process.

I'm sure that we will make our experiences known as soon as we are allowed.

I would be curious to know how many teams are planning on using Lab View vs how many are planning on using C++ (Workbench).

[Aidan F. Browne]

Originally Posted by ericand

I would be curious to know how many teams are planning on using Lab View vs how many are planning on using C++ (Workbench).

Hopefully the Beta program has half the teams use LabView and the other half Workbench in order to assure that we test it all.

[BornaE]

Originally Posted by ericand

I asked about when and what we get to share as soon as I got the notice that we were in the Beta program and I saw the NDA.

The response I got back was that the timeline and parameters will be listed on the Beta Team web site, which we will get access to once we complete the registration process.

I'm sure that we will make our experiences known as soon as we are allowed.

I would be curious to know how many teams are planning on using Lab View vs how many are planning on using C++ (Workbench).

We are using both Labview and c\c++

[Dowjonesbotics]

Congrats 1114, we can't wait. (Not like this was obvious 1114 would get it)

[Robostang 548]

Originally Posted by rwood359

I realize that the beta program is probably a check of the documentation as much as of the hardware. The announcement said that shipments of the systems would start on Sept. 15th. so if it is going to be a serial process of release to the beta teams, update, and then release the remaining teams, the non-beta teams are probably not going to see the documents for 8-12 weeks.

The first rev of technical documents are usually full of ambiguities that the writers and the people close to the project don't see because the resolution is obvious to them. I would like to see all of the documentation available and a forum where we can start commenting and asking questions as soon as possible.

Is there any word yet on when WPIlib is gonna be released. I read somewhere that there would be an initial release of some code around this time and that the final release would come with the 2009 electronics kit. I know the beta teams will get a chance to use it now but will non-beta teams be able to take a look at the code?

[RoboMom]

A housekeeping issue:
If you are one of the selected teams, you should have received an official notification of Beta team test status and a follow-up email.

If you haven't: contact frcteams@usfirst.org

Apparently some spam filters have been working overtime for some email addresses.

[Kevin Sevcik]

I won't really speak to the issue of the NDA and whether it makes sense, as it's FIRST's decision and they obviously have their own opinion on whether rumor mongering and misinformation will be better or worse in an information vacuum... But I do have a suggestion for them and NI, since I haven't seen any indication that someone has already thought of it.

Obviously, they want to get info out to teams as quickly as possible once they decide it's appropriate. Presumably, they want to expedite the training process for teams by requiring the beta test teams to hold seminars and release code and etc. But they must surely know that the training and code releases are fairly meaningless to any teams that don't actually have the coding environment to work in. Trying to work with and learn from Labview code when your Labview install doesn't have the required modules and you don't have the subVIs is about as productive as trying to learn about the .NET APIs by looking at someone else's code in notepad. It's possible, but it's going to be slow, painful, and incomplete. As I recall, it's not even possible to do some of the things you need to without the Labview RT module. So teams giving seminars could be in the difficult position of having to demonstrate everything in step by step cookbook fashion thoroughly enough that the attendees will be successful when they finally have software to work with.

I know FIRST has pledged to get hardware and software to registered and paid teams as soon as feasible, but even then that doesn't help rookies and teams that can't get money right away. Given FIRST's close partnership with NI, though, there's a pretty simple and cool solution. NI has an online demo environment of Labview that's kitted out with every module available. You can't load or save external files of course. But I don't think it would be incredibly difficult for NI to set up a second, FRC only server that's running the version of Labview we'll be using and that's pre-loaded with the default code and tutorials. In fact, you could even update the environment on a regular basis to update the FRC support code, add new tutorials, post beta test teams' example code.... All sorts of things. I, personally, think this would be a brilliant way of making training extremely accessible to any team that wants it and doesn't happen to live near a beta site. Like, london, or brazil, or a rather large percentage of the US.

[BornaE]

Sounds like a great idea, specially with LabView

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

I won't really speak to the issue of the NDA and whether it makes sense, as it's FIRST's decision and they obviously have their own opinion on whether rumor mongering and misinformation will be better or worse in an information vacuum... But I do have a suggestion for them and NI, since I haven't seen any indication that someone has already thought of it.

Obviously, they want to get info out to teams as quickly as possible once they decide it's appropriate. Presumably, they want to expedite the training process for teams by requiring the beta test teams to hold seminars and release code and etc. But they must surely know that the training and code releases are fairly meaningless to any teams that don't actually have the coding environment to work in. Trying to work with and learn from Labview code when your Labview install doesn't have the required modules and you don't have the subVIs is about as productive as trying to learn about the .NET APIs by looking at someone else's code in notepad. It's possible, but it's going to be slow, painful, and incomplete. As I recall, it's not even possible to do some of the things you need to without the Labview RT module. So teams giving seminars could be in the difficult position of having to demonstrate everything in step by step cookbook fashion thoroughly enough that the attendees will be successful when they finally have software to work with.

I know FIRST has pledged to get hardware and software to registered and paid teams as soon as feasible, but even then that doesn't help rookies and teams that can't get money right away. Given FIRST's close partnership with NI, though, there's a pretty simple and cool solution. NI has an online demo environment of Labview that's kitted out with every module available. You can't load or save external files of course. But I don't think it would be incredibly difficult for NI to set up a second, FRC only server that's running the version of Labview we'll be using and that's pre-loaded with the default code and tutorials. In fact, you could even update the environment on a regular basis to update the FRC support code, add new tutorials, post beta test teams' example code.... All sorts of things. I, personally, think this would be a brilliant way of making training extremely accessible to any team that wants it and doesn't happen to live near a beta site. Like, london, or brazil, or a rather large percentage of the US.