1.5.1 source?
Moderators: jsmcortina, muythaibxr
1.5.1 source?
Guys,
Happy FRIDAY!
Are there any plans to release the source code for 1.5.1?
Happy FRIDAY!
Are there any plans to release the source code for 1.5.1?
Eric Law
1990 Audi 80 quattro with AAN turbo engine: happily running on MS3+MS3X
2012 Audi A4 quattro, desperately in need of tweaking
Be alert! America needs more lerts.
1990 Audi 80 quattro with AAN turbo engine: happily running on MS3+MS3X
2012 Audi A4 quattro, desperately in need of tweaking
Be alert! America needs more lerts.
Re: 1.5.1 source?
Yes please.... since the dev's seem to have gone on an extended holiday.
Toyota Celica GT4/Alltrac with 5S-GTE stroker (2.2L I4 turbo, high CR) on E85 w/FlexFuel.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
-
- Experienced MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:26 am
- Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Re: 1.5.1 source?
subscribed... especialy due to all the changes concerning engine states, it would be nice to look up some stuff in Detail so don't have to bother the dev's with "stupid" questions ;-)
A soon source release would be highly appreciated.
A soon source release would be highly appreciated.
Honda CRX B16A1 Turbo | MS3 running | pre1.5.1 beta7 Firmware | 24/1 Dual Wheel | COP ignition | 725cc ID injectors
-
- Master MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 687
- Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 3:52 pm
Re: 1.5.1 source?
I would like to turn outputs on/off using a custom comparison between two of my generic sensors, but currently the only way to do that is to add my own code to the ms3_user.c file and recompile. So I too would like to see a release of the current source code.
MS3-Pro 1st Gen | Honda K24 Supercharged
MS3/MS3X | SB Ford 347 stroker
MS3/MS3X | SB Ford 347 stroker
Re: 1.5.1 source?
there have been some threads about this.
And nothing happend over long time. Its really frustrating.
No support anymore.
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 31&t=65165
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 25&t=65952
And nothing happend over long time. Its really frustrating.
No support anymore.
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 31&t=65165
http://www.msextra.com/forums/viewtopic ... 25&t=65952
Re: 1.5.1 source?
Make some noise about it in the https://www.facebook.com/groups/megasquirtOC Facebook Group.
Lack of support from the dev's is very bad PR, it'll make something happen.
Lack of support from the dev's is very bad PR, it'll make something happen.
Toyota Celica GT4/Alltrac with 5S-GTE stroker (2.2L I4 turbo, high CR) on E85 w/FlexFuel.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
Re: 1.5.1 source?
To all of you bitching...... You do realize than both Ken and James ( the developers) have day jobs? And that they are only minimally compensated ( if at all) for their time? Making noise on facebook is childish and unproductive. Besides, go contact Holley, Motec, Haltec or AEM and ask for their source code and see what happens.MWPau wrote:Make some noise about it in the https://www.facebook.com/groups/megasquirtOC Facebook Group.
Lack of support from the dev's is very bad PR, it'll make something happen.
Linfert Performance/321 Motorsports
SCCA 2019 SM National Champion Crew Chief
SCCA 2023 FP National Champion Tuner/electrical engineer
100s of MS systems built installed and tuned
Support the developers!
SCCA 2019 SM National Champion Crew Chief
SCCA 2023 FP National Champion Tuner/electrical engineer
100s of MS systems built installed and tuned
Support the developers!
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 8230
- Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 12:48 pm
Re: 1.5.1 source?
^ This. At least for me.
Megasquirt is not for use on pollution controlled vehicles. Any advice I give is for off road use only.
Re: 1.5.1 source?
Agreed.
My interest in the source is to assist with testing, improvements, and bug fixes which will be contributed back to the source.
I have given some bug feedback privately by email to James, which is likely not the best way. They were simple-ish bugs and I have well-tested, and documented
logic analyzer info and scope traces.
The bugs I am looking at existed in 1.4, so I will develop fixes in that. I can then contribute them as a patch to the current source.
I can't run the earlier version, as I need the new stuff in 1.5.1.
Best regards,
TurboBob
My interest in the source is to assist with testing, improvements, and bug fixes which will be contributed back to the source.
I have given some bug feedback privately by email to James, which is likely not the best way. They were simple-ish bugs and I have well-tested, and documented
logic analyzer info and scope traces.
The bugs I am looking at existed in 1.4, so I will develop fixes in that. I can then contribute them as a patch to the current source.
I can't run the earlier version, as I need the new stuff in 1.5.1.
Best regards,
TurboBob
-
- Experienced MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:26 am
- Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Re: 1.5.1 source?
I agree on that, i would also assume that there is a reason for the lack of response or releasing the source. Anyhow i hope for a sooner or later release, as it would help - at least to me - to understand some not so well documented featues. Also i see it like TurboBob, if you can take a look to the source, troubleshooting for a potential bug is much easier.prof315 wrote:To all of you bitching...... You do realize than both Ken and James ( the developers) have day jobs? And that they are only minimally compensated ( if at all) for their time? Making noise on facebook is childish and unproductive. Besides, go contact Holley, Motec, Haltec or AEM and ask for their source code and see what happens.
I tried also to look at the 1.4 source, but with so much big changes, often its a bit gueswork.
So, i hope you will find some time for the release... as saied before, i would highly appreciate it. But if there are major reasons, don't feel yourself pushed.
Thanks
Honda CRX B16A1 Turbo | MS3 running | pre1.5.1 beta7 Firmware | 24/1 Dual Wheel | COP ignition | 725cc ID injectors
Re: 1.5.1 source?
Bitching?prof315 wrote:To all of you bitching...... You do realize than both Ken and James ( the developers) have day jobs? And that they are only minimally compensated ( if at all) for their time?
I bought into this system because it appeared it was powerful, under constant development, and the source was available to hack if odd features were needed.
Now none of these things are true.
Actually, no i didn't know they have day jobs
I find that fact quite incredible really... how can MS not have at least one fulltime paid firmware dev?
And If that's not a reason to release the firmware, i don't know what is.
I really fear for MS's future.
It's a shame.
Toyota Celica GT4/Alltrac with 5S-GTE stroker (2.2L I4 turbo, high CR) on E85 w/FlexFuel.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
Re: 1.5.1 source?
If you go back through the MS3 development threads you'll see that current release source code is rarely if ever released.MWPau wrote:Bitching?prof315 wrote:To all of you bitching...... You do realize than both Ken and James ( the developers) have day jobs? And that they are only minimally compensated ( if at all) for their time?
I bought into this system because it appeared it was powerful, under constant development, and the source was available to hack if odd features were needed.
Now none of these things are true.
Actually, no i didn't know they have day jobs
I find that fact quite incredible really... how can MS not have at least one fulltime paid firmware dev?
And If that's not a reason to release the firmware, i don't know what is.
I really fear for MS's future.
It's a shame.
So how is MS suddenly not a powerful system? MS is indeed under constant development, but sometimes it comes in fits and spurts. I suggest you read the firmware and source code licensing agreement stickied at the top of this subforum, and again what other mainstream EMS lets you even look at ANY source code?
Given that MS outsells all other EMS systems combined I'd say the future is pretty secure.
Linfert Performance/321 Motorsports
SCCA 2019 SM National Champion Crew Chief
SCCA 2023 FP National Champion Tuner/electrical engineer
100s of MS systems built installed and tuned
Support the developers!
SCCA 2019 SM National Champion Crew Chief
SCCA 2023 FP National Champion Tuner/electrical engineer
100s of MS systems built installed and tuned
Support the developers!
-
- Experienced MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:26 am
- Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Re: 1.5.1 source?
Hi prof315,
the last released source was 1.4.0, there was a 1.4.1 FW released in 2017 and a 1.5.0 in Oct 2017.
I'am not aware of the amount of changes, but i assume at least between 1.4.1 and 1.5.0 there where quite a few.
I guess what MWPau want's to say is, that the ability to look in some source details (for either documentation or personal feature development) is a very big unique difference to almost any other EMS manufacturer. And if that is no longer given, there are also a lot of alternitives on the market. Concerning feature set, as well as price.
My personal reasons for choosing MS over ALL other ECUs where two main points:
1) Hardware flexibility (i rather mod my ECU to fit my engine hardware in a nice clean way then the other way around and especialy because my honda environment is not the most common for most other aftermarket ECUs)
2) the availability of the source for the above reasons (which i checked are fully within the license agreement).
Ok, i can understand that with the latest product (MS3), the handling of the source is handled a bit more restricted due to the HW clone problem.
Because with MS2 (which shares a lot of features too) it was handled differently. But in the end it's also a high inconvenience towards the customers who choose the product for exactly that reason. But when you take a look at all the 3 threads where some ppl asked for the source release, there was no real explanation about why not and maybe when from the dev's. The closes was "we do it when we are ready to".
This is a not very polite practice (even if i still think that they have their reasons). Just in general it would be nice if someone can tell all of us about the reasons.
Is it because of some private time constrains?
or other personal reasons?
Is the cloning the issue - so maybe you can say, we will release only the source for the 2nd to last version (for example) then everybody knows what he is into.
I hope nobody understands this as an offence, as i'am a SW developer as well, i can totaly understand that, and that MS source is not classical "open source" is totaly clear.
And i highly appreciate that there is at least one ECU developer who releases the code, because almost nobody else does, so it's realy something which sets MS apart from all others.
Currently i've tried to be on the edge of the development, also because i likes some new features and i would like to contribute to the developmen with either improvement suggestions or bug reports. I think both is hopefully still welcome for the developers.
But if it is really the case (sorry, with MS2 i was used to be a bit different) that the source is kept closed for an unknown amount of time, i would rather stick with the last source released firmware to be able to help me out mayself (as i described above), rather the participate on the latest edge of the development.
Only excuse woule be, if there is a real cutting edge feature i would not miss at any price. Again, no offence, just a personal decision which fit's me best in the circumstances... bug again, i would really like to understand the reasons behind, so i can maybe have a better understanding.
PS: by the way, where do you have the information from (just curiosity) that MS outsells all other ECU manufacturers together?
Best regards
the last released source was 1.4.0, there was a 1.4.1 FW released in 2017 and a 1.5.0 in Oct 2017.
I'am not aware of the amount of changes, but i assume at least between 1.4.1 and 1.5.0 there where quite a few.
I guess what MWPau want's to say is, that the ability to look in some source details (for either documentation or personal feature development) is a very big unique difference to almost any other EMS manufacturer. And if that is no longer given, there are also a lot of alternitives on the market. Concerning feature set, as well as price.
My personal reasons for choosing MS over ALL other ECUs where two main points:
1) Hardware flexibility (i rather mod my ECU to fit my engine hardware in a nice clean way then the other way around and especialy because my honda environment is not the most common for most other aftermarket ECUs)
2) the availability of the source for the above reasons (which i checked are fully within the license agreement).
Ok, i can understand that with the latest product (MS3), the handling of the source is handled a bit more restricted due to the HW clone problem.
Because with MS2 (which shares a lot of features too) it was handled differently. But in the end it's also a high inconvenience towards the customers who choose the product for exactly that reason. But when you take a look at all the 3 threads where some ppl asked for the source release, there was no real explanation about why not and maybe when from the dev's. The closes was "we do it when we are ready to".
This is a not very polite practice (even if i still think that they have their reasons). Just in general it would be nice if someone can tell all of us about the reasons.
Is it because of some private time constrains?
or other personal reasons?
Is the cloning the issue - so maybe you can say, we will release only the source for the 2nd to last version (for example) then everybody knows what he is into.
I hope nobody understands this as an offence, as i'am a SW developer as well, i can totaly understand that, and that MS source is not classical "open source" is totaly clear.
And i highly appreciate that there is at least one ECU developer who releases the code, because almost nobody else does, so it's realy something which sets MS apart from all others.
Currently i've tried to be on the edge of the development, also because i likes some new features and i would like to contribute to the developmen with either improvement suggestions or bug reports. I think both is hopefully still welcome for the developers.
But if it is really the case (sorry, with MS2 i was used to be a bit different) that the source is kept closed for an unknown amount of time, i would rather stick with the last source released firmware to be able to help me out mayself (as i described above), rather the participate on the latest edge of the development.
Only excuse woule be, if there is a real cutting edge feature i would not miss at any price. Again, no offence, just a personal decision which fit's me best in the circumstances... bug again, i would really like to understand the reasons behind, so i can maybe have a better understanding.
PS: by the way, where do you have the information from (just curiosity) that MS outsells all other ECU manufacturers together?
Best regards
Honda CRX B16A1 Turbo | MS3 running | pre1.5.1 beta7 Firmware | 24/1 Dual Wheel | COP ignition | 725cc ID injectors
Re: 1.5.1 source?
That's true.... but it's been 3 years now.prof315 wrote:If you go back through the MS3 development threads you'll see that current release source code is rarely if ever released.
Not suddenly, but the other guys are adding useful features at a quicker rate than MS is.So how is MS suddenly not a powerful system? MS is indeed under constant development, but sometimes it comes in fits and spurts.
MS was bang for buck... that's quickly not becoming the case.
I'm personally REALLY liking what the Adaptronic guys are doing. And their ECUs are comparably priced with the MS3Pro's.
Have a look at this for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agjcg8MIp7A
Watch a few of their videos and tell me you're not impressed.
None, but how is 3yr old source useful to anyone anyway?I suggest you read the firmware and source code licensing agreement stickied at the top of this subforum, and again what other mainstream EMS lets you even look at ANY source code?
If im looking for a particular issue with 1.5.1, the source for 1.4 is of no use at all.
And yes... ive actually done this while trying to work out exactly how the horrid MS3 CANBUS support works.
Hah, no chance. Got any sales data to back that up?Given that MS outsells all other EMS systems combined. I'd say the future is pretty secure.
Toyota Celica GT4/Alltrac with 5S-GTE stroker (2.2L I4 turbo, high CR) on E85 w/FlexFuel.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
MS3 + MS3X + KnockBoard + RTC + BT + DIY CAN-IO-Board + DIY CAN Digital Dash.
Re: 1.5.1 source?
The Adaptronic video you linked doesn't really impress. MS has had "simulated O-scope" capability for years. The price point isn't horrible but until you can show me an ECU that supports 8 cylinder full sequential operation for under $600 ( MS3 kit +3X board) MS remains the bang for the buck champ.
As far as the MS outselling the rest of the competition combined.... it was mentioned in passing at a tuning seminar ( generic NOT MS specific) I attended last month.
Please don't misunderstand. I'm not saying MS is perfect. It suits me and my customers very well. And yes there're things I'd like to see that aren't there yet. I do know that they will most likely make the feature list eventually. I'm still waiting for firmware fixes from AEM over 10 years after proving to them there was a nasty bug in their firmware lol.
As far as the MS outselling the rest of the competition combined.... it was mentioned in passing at a tuning seminar ( generic NOT MS specific) I attended last month.
Please don't misunderstand. I'm not saying MS is perfect. It suits me and my customers very well. And yes there're things I'd like to see that aren't there yet. I do know that they will most likely make the feature list eventually. I'm still waiting for firmware fixes from AEM over 10 years after proving to them there was a nasty bug in their firmware lol.
Linfert Performance/321 Motorsports
SCCA 2019 SM National Champion Crew Chief
SCCA 2023 FP National Champion Tuner/electrical engineer
100s of MS systems built installed and tuned
Support the developers!
SCCA 2019 SM National Champion Crew Chief
SCCA 2023 FP National Champion Tuner/electrical engineer
100s of MS systems built installed and tuned
Support the developers!
Re: 1.5.1 source?
I'd also like to request the 1.5.1 source be released.
As to asking the other big names in aftermarket ECU's for their source, there's no chance they'd give it, and that's part of the reason I don't own one.
As to asking the other big names in aftermarket ECU's for their source, there's no chance they'd give it, and that's part of the reason I don't own one.
Re: 1.5.1 source?
Exactly. For me it was the big advantage of the Megasquirt that the Source Code is available and that there is ongoing development, where ideas/feedback of the community have influnce.letitsnow wrote:I'd also like to request the 1.5.1 source be released.
As to asking the other big names in aftermarket ECU's for their source, there's no chance they'd give it, and that's part of the reason I don't own one.
But both things seemed to have changed in the last time.
And in 1.5 there was this (for me) huge new step which allows DBW. This is so great. There are so many ideas what you can do with this. But without source code you can do nothing.
-
- Experienced MS/Extra'er
- Posts: 299
- Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:26 am
- Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Re: 1.5.1 source?
Hi,
from what i have understood between the lines, the dev's are quite busy right now and maybe there are some internal decisions not to release the latest source.
As we know, the dev's are also have daily Jobs and Familys.
Don't ask me, i don't know any Details about any of that, thats why i also hope that the dev's at least find some time to talk to the community about the reasons and maybe about their future plans so everybody knows what to expect.
from what i have understood between the lines, the dev's are quite busy right now and maybe there are some internal decisions not to release the latest source.
As we know, the dev's are also have daily Jobs and Familys.
Don't ask me, i don't know any Details about any of that, thats why i also hope that the dev's at least find some time to talk to the community about the reasons and maybe about their future plans so everybody knows what to expect.
Honda CRX B16A1 Turbo | MS3 running | pre1.5.1 beta7 Firmware | 24/1 Dual Wheel | COP ignition | 725cc ID injectors
Re: 1.5.1 source?
By essentially "locking" the development team to 2 individuals (has been that way since the beginning?) the product IMO can't scale which is a huge risk. You look at companies like Haltech for example, they have flexible, bleeding edge code in their ECU's, in house testing and also release updates very aggressively because it is an end to end business where Megasquirt is half a business; example, DIY Autotune for the hardware, but the code is a mish-mash of semi-open-closed source under an EULA of sorts.
No offence whatsoever to Ken or James, as I think they've done an absolute stellar job to get the code to where it is today considering they naturally have other commitments in life plus have been doing this for a long time now, however as I said above it's not just scalable with 2 human beings doing the work, a large user base, some high profile people now promoting the MS3PRO line (Chris/Kamakaze from Street Outlaws was once an MS3Pro user but went Haltech, not sure what happened there..) and other manufacturers releasing ECU's very close to the MS range from a feature/price perspective so it'll be interesting to see where it ends up in 18-24 months.
No offence whatsoever to Ken or James, as I think they've done an absolute stellar job to get the code to where it is today considering they naturally have other commitments in life plus have been doing this for a long time now, however as I said above it's not just scalable with 2 human beings doing the work, a large user base, some high profile people now promoting the MS3PRO line (Chris/Kamakaze from Street Outlaws was once an MS3Pro user but went Haltech, not sure what happened there..) and other manufacturers releasing ECU's very close to the MS range from a feature/price perspective so it'll be interesting to see where it ends up in 18-24 months.
Sydney, Australia
1971 Holden Monaro HQ
MS3X Sequentially fuelled 400 Pontiac
1971 Holden Monaro HQ
MS3X Sequentially fuelled 400 Pontiac
-
- MS/Extra Newbie
- Posts: 33
- Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2016 2:22 pm
Re: 1.5.1 source?
I also selected the MS platform because source code was available and I like experimenting and adjusting it to suit me. I'm patiently waiting for 1.5 source code and have read the reasons why it hasn't been released. I'll happily continue running and modding my 1.4 based code knowing this is way easier and better than the reverse engineering I did on competitive products. Has anyone approached the team with a signed NDA while asking for the source?
I just finished writing code to control a DBW throttle and I talk to the MS over CAN and tune my device using TunerStudio - there is so much you can do outside of the ECU firmware too! Not having 1.5 source shouldn't be holding you up from modding that doesn't have to do with core fuel/spark/sensor modifications - want 100 'loop' outputs, more PIDs, PWMs, inputs, maps that have something other than rpm as the X axis, etc? Its just a little code and a small circuit listening/transmitting on the CAN bus.Speedy_G wrote:And in 1.5 there was this (for me) huge new step which allows DBW. This is so great. There are so many ideas what you can do with this. But without source code you can do nothing.
Camaro, Mark IV aluminum big block Chevy, 8.8l, Procharger F1-R @ 12psi, MS3Pro