You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Related to #5, but slightly different: should we add a config option that defines both the board (the HEX_NANO section in def.h) and the actual copter (the #define HEX6X in config.h)?
I'd like to have a single codebase for building the hex and quad variants, not 2 different codebases like flexbot has.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I would go with this. An option for the board, an option for the copter.
Easier to understand, more flexible, easier to maintain too (one codebase
only).
On Apr 18, 2014 2:08 PM, "Koen Kooi" [email protected] wrote:
Related to #5#5,
but slightly different: should we add a config option that defines both the
board (the HEX_NANO section in def.h) and the actual copter (the #define
HEX6X in config.h)?
I'd like to have a single codebase for building the hex and quad variants,
not 2 different codebases like flexbot has.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/6
.
Related to #5, but slightly different: should we add a config option that defines both the board (the HEX_NANO section in def.h) and the actual copter (the #define HEX6X in config.h)?
I'd like to have a single codebase for building the hex and quad variants, not 2 different codebases like flexbot has.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: