How do I know which nightly to run?

My only requirement is the way in which the power is handled on the A7105 module for controlling my Hubsans. I'm running a nightly now on a 7E with 2 modules (NRF and A7105) but I arbitrarily selected a nightly version and it seems to work. I just upgraded to a Devo 10 and will be installing new modules in that and wanted to know which nightly to go with. Based on the dates, are these even being developed anymore? Doesn't nightly imply a new version every night? Not a developer so I don't know the lingo.

Nightly implies a new version every night that changes are committed to the main code branch. Since it's a volunteer project, how much gets done on any given day - or week - varies wildly day to day and week to week.

I don't think anyone but PB (the original author) commits to the main code branch without getting other developers to review their changes. Again, volunteer work, so it takes time.

The only real rule of thumb is that if there are changes to a nightly shortly after one was built, it's probably because there were bugs in the older one, so avoid the older one. If the most recent one is relatively old, that's your best bet. If the most recent one was in the last day or so and the one before it has an age measured in weeks, the older of those two is probably your best bet.

This is a rule of thumb and not hard and fast, though. Some bugs in the KN protocol were fixed recently, the pull request was submitted today, and I just approved it. It may or may not get committed tonight, but a build with just those changes in it will be better than the older one, because all it has is that bug fix, which took a while to get done. On the other hand, if some new code gets into the build as well, then maybe you want to live with the bugs in the KN protocol.

So, have I successfully failed to clarify anything?

Thank you sir. That explains it perfectly. Part of my reason for asking is due to the fact that I was getting some module errors on the screen of my 7E on my first attempt to run one of the nightlies after installing my modules. Can't say it was build related or something I screwed up but since I had that issue I tend be under the impression that there was only one good working combination. This is probably not a true statement and my problem may have been unrelated to the version i was trying to run but its stuck in my head nonetheless. When was the new wiring support added - which nightly version? I dont know the specifics - something about the GIO pins or the like.

All the nightlies use the new wiring. Well, all of them for over a year now. Not sure when between 4.0.1 and last august that was added.

mwm wrote: All the nightlies use the new wiring. Well, all of them for over a year now. Not sure when between 4.0.1 and last august that was added.

Good to know. I'll grab the latest after I get my Devo 10 modules installed. Now I just need to figure out the best way to handle the antennas on each module. I'm about to embark on modding up my new Devo 10. My 7e is a mess. Both module antennas just hanging out the hole in the top of the controller where the old antenna housing used to be. Tried to widen it up and they still wouldn't all fit. I want to keep my Devo 10 clean and get the best range possible as I've lost one too many quads due to signal loss.And I managed to break the battery door on the 10 in the first hour. Not even in service yet. WTF

Nuggetz wrote: And I managed to break the battery door on the 10 in the first hour. Not even in service yet. WTF

Seems to be a common problem. Mine's had electrical tape holding it in place for most of it's life.

FWIW, I bit the bullet and drilled the holes for extra antennas on my 10. On the 6/7E form factor, I think the antenna farm looks a bit odd. But I like it on the 10.

mwm wrote:

Nuggetz wrote: And I managed to break the battery door on the 10 in the first hour. Not even in service yet. WTF

Seems to be a common problem. Mine's had electrical tape holding it in place for most of it's life.

FWIW, I bit the bullet and drilled the holes for extra antennas on my 10. On the 6/7E form factor, I think the antenna farm looks a bit odd. But I like it on the 10.

Well if you went the hole route then I'm sure it will be good enough for me. Got any pictures, inside or out?

I've got it open now, so here's a shot of the top of the back, with three extra antenna connectors, though it's only got two antennas in it at the moment.

goo.gl/photos/V1axyZHd21HbdJR26

mwm wrote: I've got it open now, so here's a shot of the top of the back, with three extra antenna connectors, though it's only got two antennas in it at the moment.

goo.gl/photos/V1axyZHd21HbdJR26

Thanks Mike. With regard to the wire going from the modules to their respective antennas are there any considerations with regard to its length? Also is the stock module on all the time or does the protocol you're using determine what gets used? Again I know very little about these things so wondered what effect all three antennas have to one another when located right next to each other.

I think mine are all 6" long. that's plenty to rout them down to the bottom along the sides, or to a multimodule tucked underneath the gimbal.

If you're running the nightly, it only enables the rf modules that's in use by the model. I believe 4.0.1 left them all on all the time, but I'm not positive.

I don't know that anyone has ever investigated how all these antennas affect each other.

mwm wrote: I don't know that anyone has ever investigated how all these antennas affect each other.

From my RF knowledge, I would prefer having the "active" antenna at a 90° angle to the "inactive" antennas, to minimize coupling between the modules. As all modules work on 2.4 Ghz, the antennas are resonant on the same frequency and you should avoid losing RF power by it being absorbed on another antenna having the same polarization. Please note this is just theoretical and in no way tested by me, maybe it doesn't make any difference in real life...

Just thinking out loud based on something I /think/ I heard many years ago...

If the antennas have similar or the same resonant frequency wouldn't they amplify rather than absorb?

I vaguely recall hearing that 4m ( 70mhz) ham frequency could be 'assisted' by all the old (and now redundant) band 1 TV antennas that were hanging around (like a large letter h or x , that are still on some roofs in the UK)

I am or at least was... a licensed amateur radio enthusiast, but like most hobbies the enthusiasm dissipated and I have since forgotten 90% of what I knew to get the ticket

I'm sure there's more than one type of antenna design with undriven or parasitic elements used to an advantage (Yagi Uda is the only one I can put a name to off the top of my head)

But yep some black art type voodoo stuff right there, which as you rightly point out, may or may not make a jot of difference to our real world situation

2 of my modules antennas are at 90 degrees to each other, but due to the physical constraints of the TX's case the 3rd had to share the same plane to one of them...internally across the top laid horizontall, not ideal but I only use it to fly smaller 'toy' helis so line of sight is not /that/ far away and I seem to have got away with it so far

Regards
Rob