jotego wrote:Certainly, taking into account coders' motivation is important but I think the motivation is not only fun, there is also a social aspect. When we, coders, see people enjoying our work and giving us appreciation back, it feels great. So recognition is a factor too. Another one is collaboration in the scene. At the beginning is fun to do some small coding alone but working with others, especially with other people who has a name in the scene feels great. Finally, having clear goals help developers too. It is not the same to work towards one satisfaction that to try to meet some community set standard of quality.
So I think that having specifications for the cores, and having them listed publicly will help MiST overall. Of course, from the user perspective it helps too. I think the list from Newsdee is a good starting place. It needs more visibility. Maybe a link from the Github site of MiST? People who are not coders could make the quality team. A section on the wiki page of the Github site could be a good hosting location.
Coders who are not actively writing new cores, can spend some time reviewing cores from a hardware design perspective to identify issues. We need the cores to be as clean and compliant to high quality HDL as possible because otherwise, either they fail to operate reliably or development stops because issues become intractable.
As part of the recognition process to motivate coders follow this quality standard, we could have a prize in Summer and another in Winter for the best cores. We give this event some publicity in social media. This will attract both new developers too and new users. This will also show the importance of the people working on the quality team as they become judges of the work.
Well, I am just throwing ideas out because I want to keep working as a developer and not as quality but I hope some people will take the lead here. We really need people looking at these things. It's like a business, we need a quality department and some managers to organize the team. Maybe we also need marketing... a Twitter/Facebook account. Indeed, there is a lot of potential here. I think this project is still on an early stage.
The spreadsheet is linked from the wiki core status page:
https://github.com/mist-devel/mist-boar ... CoreStatus
I think we should take it step by step, maybe even core by core. There's more than 40 cores for the board but not many are "done" by any means. I could suggest starting with consoles, because the variations in features are less complex than computers?
But we won't get anywhere without willing developers. I can offer you to look at the NES to start with, comparing the core with commercial (closed source) FPGA implementations and fill the gaps. You need to tell me what would help you, though.
I've tested over 700 NES games to document the gaps in detail:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... p=drivesdk
There's other worthy cores... but its a bit sad that the MiST is being eclipsed by commercial FPGA consoles due to lack of compatibility.
As it happens I have a real Famicom and a real PC Engine (both with and without CD). I also have an oscilloscope although I'm not very good with it. Not sure if that's helpful.
As for getting the word out, I started threads on AtariAge where I post when something interesting comes out:
And more generically a thread on FPGA gaming thats getting very interesting links posted by a few people:
http://atariage.com/forums/topic/262816 ... e-f-p-g-a/