Author Topic: About forking Magic Lantern and the support that can be provided on this forum  (Read 106196 times)

Marsu42

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1557
  • 66d + flashes
I agree. Why would anyone not share and give back to the parent?

Because writing some patches with  trashy commit comments for personal use (like I also do) is quick, but doing proper patches for merging back is much more work as you usually also have to discuss and adapt the code again after review.

Also if you're not a core dev, at the end of the day you can only hope and wait if something is accepted or not as you're having no influence on the development policy. So if some of your patches aren't accepted but you of course still want to use them, you inevitably end up with a personal ML fork as 1% did ... and he was nice enough to share it rather than use a private repo.

But yes, all, this is not your problem. you just want camera software.

Not necessarily, or people wouldn't be writing here :-o

On top of that the implication FEELS like throw out your work and cease to exist.

I understand you're feeling an attachment for your work and for people using it (like probably every ML coder does), but you somehow managed to make it appear like you wouldn't mind all 6d/7d/m users to use TL while ML didn't even compile for some time. Given the part of code written by other people, this just couldn't have worked out.

I was happy to see when you merged back some TL code, but obviously it was too little too late - but still I do really hope you will continue to do so as you are are nice to talk with and I cannot thank you enough for bringing ML to the 6d.

Anyways, these are/were my motivations. I just don't feel good about any of the hostility or schism from what essentially is my first real coding project and mostly a thankless labor of love. At the same time I don't like letting ML down and pissing off A1ex to the point he wants to quit. So everything seems like its burning and I feel like shit and there you go.

I'd like to note that at least I am in no way hostile, though I understand the current motivation and think a clear cut is for the best, even if you currently might not feel that way. Maybe try to see it this way: as TL has more experimental patches and crashes more often any confusion with ML is better avoided, even if I use your beep code in my personal ML 6d repo.

nanomad

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2918
  • All your websites are belong to us
Anyways, these are/were my motivations. I just don't feel good about any of the hostility or schism from what essentially is my first real coding project and mostly a thankless labor of love. At the same time I don't like letting ML down and pissing off A1ex to the point he wants to quit. So everything seems like its burning and I feel like shit and there you go.

I know sometimes we may come off rude or uneducated but trust me that's not the intention. There's no hostility. Quite the contrary in fact. We see potential that just needs to be put to use properly. You did a great job starting and mantaining the 6D/EOSM/50D ports in TL and I see no reason why you shouldn't be contribuiting more back to ML.

True, your patches may have to go through the review process and may be declined or you will be asked to re-write them substantially. But that's what we have started doing too. Work in a branch, submit a PR and ask for a review.
Your latest efforts are not "too little too late". If anything, they are showing that this model may work for ML.

Declaring TL or any other "fork that went too far" as unsupported and out of the scope of this forum is just a way to give devs a push toward the proper direction.  That's the intention, at least.

EOS 1100D | EOS 650 (No, I didn't forget the D) | Ye Olde Canon EF Lenses ('87): 50 f/1.8 - 28 f/2.8 - 70-210 f/4 | EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 | Metz 36 AF-5

jayzed

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 37
I have been thrilled with ML since I first installed it on my 7D but when the exciting 5D raw features started to come through it felt a bit like the 7D had been orphaned. I am not complaining, not for a second.  I was, and still am, very impressed. I was booting ML every time I started my camera and accepted the fact that the 7D was old, difficult to work with and probably not as common with ML users as other cameras. I was content and grateful for the work that had been done.
Then I purchased a third party AC adaptor and discovered that loading ML for the 7D while in an alpha stage confused booting via the AC adaptor. I couldn't use ML with the adaptor as it stood and had to forgo using it whenever I wanted to use ML. I accepted this, of course, but one day I was browsing the ML forums to deal with some other issue when I saw mention of TL. I installed it (at my own risk, as is regularly and legitimately stated) simply to allow autobooting. Not really understanding why there was a separate version I became more and more excited as raw recording started to work. I continued to occasionally install TL updates whenever I saw that there were more features I might be interested in and when the testing done by others showed the build to be relatively stable.
After a while I was content and settled on a version. I set the camera to the best possible performance and was very happy with the situation.
But then the audio feature with raw appeared - I was in heaven! Everything I could possibly ask for out of this creaking old system was now possible and I was recording real work with the camera. Again, I settled on a version but came back occasionally to see if there were any performance improvements and/or bug fixes.  In the meantime (January) I was recording raw with backup production audio into MLV rec and couldn't believe my luck. I even decided not to buy an upgrade, I had 90% of what I wanted on my 7D already - I could wait.
That's when I started to see the comments about forks and 'rogue' builds. Although I am naïve about open source code versioning systems, it made sense to me. I saw the work done to merge the code into the main build and, wanting to be a responsible member of the community, installed the new ML builds with the intention of switching over and that would be that. However, the performance was disappointing and there was no audio so I 'downgraded' back to TL. I suppose this is one of the reasons that the ML team wants to keep things together - to keep expectations reasonable whilst keeping the code base consistent but it seems the horse has bolted on the principle here.
As someone who (very gratefully) uses the work of both A1ex (and Gagg0 and team) as well as 1%, I am hugely disappointed that it has come to this situation. I would very much like it if we could keep the TL work within the community until it's possible to merge into the ML stream. Although from what I have read here it's not a simple process and may not ever happen completely.
OK, I understand why it's important and agree with all the arguments but we have a mostly working TL version with excellent features and good performance along with information from people who have tested in quite a lot of detail to tell us what the best settings are. My concern is that all the hard work that has been done will go to waste and we'll never see equivalence on the main ML stream for the 7D. As people are doing this in their spare time I can't imagine what the motivation to improve the 7D build would be, it's an old camera and is about to be declared end-of-line, it doesn't have the x-factor of the 5D III or whatever is going to replace it. The TL version seems to me to be almost there with every possible theoretical improvement (maybe I am I wrong, are there any other magic features being considered for this camera?). A few more of the modules added and a few bug fixes would make it as close to the ML main stream as it's likely to be feature-wise (this is in my somewhat ignorant understanding - I know nothing about coding beyond basic HTML although I think I understand in principle the issues raised by A1ex). Perhaps with these tweaks it then could be frozen?
I'll accept it if I'm told to get back in my box here, I'm sure I don't fully understand the details. But I am very grateful to 1% for all the additional work, without any reduction in my admiration for the main team. I have effectively had two new cameras for free in the last year, first the original ML and then TL. I am once again prepared to settle on the latest, most stable version of TL if I have to but it feels like it would be a bit of a shame.


jayzed

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 37
Excellent! Thanks audionut.

flavediller

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 14
I'd just like to jump in and thank ML and TL and 1% and A1ex and honestly EVERYONE who has done any coding at all for this. Honestly. Its insane what you guys have done. I'm a professional cinematographer who works on a tight budget and with no added expense my ability to produce quality material has gone through the roof thanks to the magic of magic lantern and tragic lantern and everyone. Regardless of who did this or who did that....I want to make sure that you all understand that I (as a representative of the "end-user") is more appreciative than you guys will EVER KNOW. (and let me add that I am personally unaware of the names and details of the coding people...or really how the whole system or hierarchy works so I don't want to leave anyone out when I say thank you. If you are ANY part of the team I don't mean to exclude you!)

All of that being said...and please forgive my possible ignorance here...but if there a way to see the 7d Raw Thread that seems to be now closed? I won't complain about any decisions that are made regarding splitting or combining groups or whatever; its certainly not my right or concern. There is, however, a LOT of useful information (especially for people starting out) in that original 7d Raw Thread and I think it would be a shame to lose it. Maybe if necessary it could be locked so there are no more posts on it but still available to read?

Anyway those are my thoughts and let me say again that you guys have ALREADY done the impossible and ALREADY achieved miracles. Seriously. Not even kidding here. Raw high resolution video on my old canon DSLR? CRAZY!!! and amazing! THANK YOU ALL.

Audionut

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3540
  • Blunt and to the point
That 7D raw thread was 104 pages long.  Ideally, any useful information needs to be compiled into 1 single post, to make it useful.

If someone is very familiar with that thread, and wants to compile the information into a new thread (nothing TL related), I can move the thread into a visible section of the forums for a short time, until the new thread is created.

Discuss amongst yourselves, and PM me when you are ready to proceed.

simulacro

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Learning
Can please anyone tell 50d TL users where is their thread? :'(

First, thanks to Everyone for their contributions to the ML project, specially the Hero members, they made something amazing for amateurs like me and real professionals. The potential of eos cameras is now beyond what any optimistic technician would have thought.

With all respect...
I'm very surprised to see what has happened. I saw the 50d TL thread disappear and now i'm lost. Even though i'm using an old version (31 oct) I read everyday the updates to see the progress of the project. I always saw TL as part of the ML project, because there are contributions from several people. I read the whole 50d thread and now that thread is lost, because the reasons A1ex an 1% told us. That's fine. But you, as Hero members, have a responsability with the users of your development. That was your decision when you made this project public, for the use of other people. That's what i think closing the 50d TL thread is not correct (without relinking or redirecting to a new forum).

Maybe i don't have the right to say this, please forgive my dare
 
simulacrofilms.blogspot.com

Marsu42

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1557
  • 66d + flashes
Can please anyone tell 50d TL users where is their thread? :'(

Read the first post of this thread or look here directly: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?board=58.0

simulacro

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Learning
I have this message:

Quote
The topic or board you are looking for appears to be either missing or off limits to you

Maybe I'm losing something
simulacrofilms.blogspot.com

Marsu42

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1557
  • 66d + flashes
Maybe I'm losing something

Ugh? Seems to be divided in to user classes, /me as a big important hero member can access it. Just write enough forum posts (or probably donate and become a contributor) and you'll be elevated to our godly level :-p

simulacro

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Learning
Maybe you should change the error message text to this

Quote
Ugh? Seems to be divided in to user classes, /me as a big important hero member can access it. Just write enough forum posts (or probably donate and become a contributor) and you'll be elevated to our godly level :-p

That would make it more user friendly  8)
simulacrofilms.blogspot.com

a1ex

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12112
  • 5D Mark Free
The first post says it very clearly.

I’m a user, what does this mean for me?
Tragic Lantern usage and discussion will no longer be accepted on this forum. Please continue discussion about the Magic Lantern ports in these threads: 50D, 7D, EOS-M, 6D, 600D.

Also, the announcement from Andy600 from the old thread (which should be visible to admins/mods only):
To all 50D Tragic Lantern users.

First, thank you all for contributing to this thread, one of the biggest on the forum. I'm sure, like me, you learned a few things here but apologies to new 50D users who might have found it difficult to find answers among the 180+ pages.

I am now locking this thread ahead of the changes being introduced to the forum. You can read what, why and how these changes affect things here: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=11080

I completely understand the reasons behind the coming changes but I want to add a personal thank you to 1% for maintaining this third-party mod, bringing features to the 50D and other cameras that may not have made it to the main Magic Lantern builds. As I have always pointed out, I only compile the code that 1% commits to his Bitbucket repository. The 'Tragic Lantern for the 50D' builds are derived from the code maintained by the main developers (a1ex, g3gg0 and others) but tweaked, pushed and pulled by 1% for the 50D.

I personally have never experienced any major issues with Tragic Lantern on the 50D (and originally on the 600D) but, as I point out when notifying you of new builds, Tragic Lantern does not have all the built-in safety fallbacks of Magic Lantern and there is always the potential for irreversible damage to be caused to your camera.

So, third party modifications are no longer being supported in the forum which means we can no longer discuss Tragic Lantern. I will continue to upload TL builds to my Bitbucket repository for the foreseeable future but I suggest 50D TL users begin the transition to using Magic Lantern nightlies http://builds.magiclantern.fm/#/ as the builds I upload will not be supported in any way. Questions about Tragic Lantern will be met with silence and may even result in a ban from the forum so you have been warned. If you choose to download and use a Tragic Lantern build you do so on the strict understanding that you cannot ask for support on this forum!

As suggested in the thread linked to in the first line of this post, it would be helpful to the developers for users to provide bug reports for Tragic Lantern here: https://bitbucket.org/OtherOnePercent/tragic-lantern-6d/issues?status=new&status=open.

To report or request 'missing features' that may be in Tragic Lantern but not in the Nightly builds please use this topic: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=10593.0

To discuss Magic Lantern 50D builds please use this topic: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?topic=9852.0

Thanks for your understanding!



Topic locked by Andy600

jman

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Read the first post of this thread or look here directly: http://www.magiclantern.fm/forum/index.php?board=58.0
tried this link...error.....i believe this was the 7d page...anyway to get it back up ?

simulacro

  • Freshman
  • **
  • Posts: 96
  • Learning
With all respect: You are banning the TL efforts the same way Canon would with you.

The TL threads were part of the ML forum for some time and now they disappeared? Why not let them visible but closed?
simulacrofilms.blogspot.com

Genscher

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 2
With all respect: You are banning the TL efforts the same way Canon would with you.

The TL threads were part of the ML forum for some time and now they disappeared? Why not let them visible but closed?

I totally agree.

gary2013

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
I totally agree.
I thought this all was open source?

Audionut

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3540
  • Blunt and to the point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaboration

Tragic Lantern was a one way process.  The Magic Lantern developers were developing ML, and Tragic Lantern was taking these developments from ML, and developing features of it's own.
However, TL was not sharing these developments, back with ML.  Taking, taking, taking, and not giving anything back.

This is not how open source collaboration works.  ML is a development project first and foremost.  We, as users, are gifted these developments, by the developers.

During the discussion regarding these recent changes, suggestions where made, to have TL run on it's own website.  TL users are more then welcome to do as they see fit.
However, TL discussion cannot be supported on this forum.  If anyone bothers to read the OP, and consider the circumstances, beyond their own personal needs, the reasons why this decision has been made, should be abundantly clear.

Stedda

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 504
Quote
1%, the maintainer of Tragic Lantern, and other users, are free to fork and do whatever they wish with the project.

Nothing is stopping you or anyone else from starting up a new forum and carrying on. They don't want TL here being confused with Magic Lantern anymore since they deem it unsafe and don't want to provide support for things they don't agree with or problems other people created. That's their right and they've given many many chances for the situation to be turned around and nothings changed.

I support the decision and am personally glad it's finally come about. I fully trust Alex and g3gg0 and their checks and balances they require and if they stress things are unsafe then I stay away now there's no more worry about what came from where. Everything here is Magic Lantern, they way it should be.
5D Mark III -- 7D   SOLD -- EOS M 22mm 18-55mm STM -- Fuji X-T1 18-55 F2.8-F4 & 35 F1.4
Canon Glass   100L F2.8 IS -- 70-200L F4 -- 135L F2 -- 85 F1.8 -- 17-40L --  40 F2.8 -- 35 F2 IS  Sigma Glass  120-300 F2.8 OS -- 50 F1.4 -- 85 F1.4  Tamron Glass   24-70 2.8 VC   600EX-RT X3

nanomad

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2918
  • All your websites are belong to us
Also, 1% is doing an amazing job lately by providing new features and suggestions to ML.

Sure, they may take a bit longer to merge but I'm quite confident that with the help of the community pointing out the differences between TL and ML this split will soon be a thing of the past.

I just want to restate that the only TL discussions not allowed on this forum are those regarding support matters of said fork. You are incouraged to discuss key differences or missing features all you want provided it's a constructive discussion and that it's done in the proper sections and threads.
EOS 1100D | EOS 650 (No, I didn't forget the D) | Ye Olde Canon EF Lenses ('87): 50 f/1.8 - 28 f/2.8 - 70-210 f/4 | EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 | Metz 36 AF-5

johnhenryrupe

  • New to the forum
  • *
  • Posts: 18
  • Pro–am
Also, 1% is doing an amazing job lately by providing new features and suggestions to ML.

Sure, they may take a bit longer to merge but I'm quite confident that with the help of the community pointing out the differences between TL and ML this split will soon be a thing of the past.

I just want to restate that the only TL discussions not allowed on this forum are those regarding support matters of said fork. You are incouraged to discuss key differences or missing features all you want provided it's a constructive discussion and that it's done in the proper sections and threads.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaboration

Tragic Lantern was a one way process.  The Magic Lantern developers were developing ML, and Tragic Lantern was taking these developments from ML, and developing features of it's own.
However, TL was not sharing these developments, back with ML.  Taking, taking, taking, and not giving anything back.

This is not how open source collaboration works.  ML is a development project first and foremost.  We, as users, are gifted these developments, by the developers.

During the discussion regarding these recent changes, suggestions where made, to have TL run on it's own website.  TL users are more then welcome to do as they see fit.
However, TL discussion cannot be supported on this forum.  If anyone bothers to read the OP, and consider the circumstances, beyond their own personal needs, the reasons why this decision has been made, should be abundantly clear.

Sooooo is Tragic Lantern taking taking taking, or providing new features?????

Audionut

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3540
  • Blunt and to the point
Sooooo is Tragic Lantern taking taking taking, or providing new features?????

Tragic Lantern was a one way process.  The Magic Lantern developers were developing ML, and Tragic Lantern was taking these developments from ML, and developing features of it's own.
However, TL was not sharing these developments, back with ML.  Taking, taking, taking, and not giving anything back.

Was.

nanomad

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2918
  • All your websites are belong to us
Maybe it's not clear enough. It used to be a one way process. TL using the ML code base then adding features and fixes on top but rarely pushing those fixes back. As the number of fixes increases it got harder to play "try to blindly port what TL has". Especially without a camera to test things on and with a objectively poor coding standards.

Right now things have changed a bit as 1% pushes things back to ML as soon as they are done. They will undergo code review as all the other contributions do and eventually land in ML too.
This is how things should be done. But there's still quite few fixes buried in TL that need porting and we can only figure those out if the community reports them.
EOS 1100D | EOS 650 (No, I didn't forget the D) | Ye Olde Canon EF Lenses ('87): 50 f/1.8 - 28 f/2.8 - 70-210 f/4 | EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 | Metz 36 AF-5

nanomad

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2918
  • All your websites are belong to us
well, if that is true, then let us talk with 1%. I am concerned that he told me he can now fix the EOSM to have a headphone output. Then all this stuff started here and we can't get what was wanted by many loyal forum users, like myself, who have asked for this and waited patiently.

Then the EOSM thread is waiting for you.
Keep in mind that if said changes involve patching assertions in canon code they won't likely make into ML any time soon.
Assertions are there for a reason and we don't mess with those as they could cause the camera to enter an invalid state and potentially brick.
EOS 1100D | EOS 650 (No, I didn't forget the D) | Ye Olde Canon EF Lenses ('87): 50 f/1.8 - 28 f/2.8 - 70-210 f/4 | EF-S 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 | Metz 36 AF-5

gary2013

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 660
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collaboration

Tragic Lantern was a one way process.  The Magic Lantern developers were developing ML, and Tragic Lantern was taking these developments from ML, and developing features of it's own.
However, TL was not sharing these developments, back with ML.  Taking, taking, taking, and not giving anything back.

This is not how open source collaboration works.  ML is a development project first and foremost.  We, as users, are gifted these developments, by the developers.

During the discussion regarding these recent changes, suggestions where made, to have TL run on it's own website.  TL users are more then welcome to do as they see fit.
However, TL discussion cannot be supported on this forum.  If anyone bothers to read the OP, and consider the circumstances, beyond their own personal needs, the reasons why this decision has been made, should be abundantly clear.
I understood all of that. The big problem is constantly hearing one side say how terrible and unsafe T_ is and yet I keep saying I have used every new build everyday and I never had any problems. Yet no one from ML wants to discuss that openly and then maybe rethink their general public statements. We now have a poster (more than likely he is not an M, 6D or 7D user) claiming his loyal faith to ML and he will always believe anything ML tells him. That is sort of pathetic from my view. Maybe he missed my posts in the past about how it never hurt my camera in anyway. Probably no will will see any posts with all the T_ threads closed and hidden now. I am still wondering about this open source if old threads keep getting closed and then censored.

I am asking ML to show actual proof that T_ has caused anyone to have these unsafe things happen they claim. Because it sure has not happened here on my M camera withg every build since last July to date.

I am happy to see at least some people speaking out more on this and a little bit of discussion being made openly.