Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Common Issues and Solutions #515

Open
Daltz333 opened this issue Jan 25, 2020 · 23 comments
Open

Common Issues and Solutions #515

Daltz333 opened this issue Jan 25, 2020 · 23 comments
Labels

Comments

@Daltz333
Copy link
Member

Meant to compile a list of common issues and solutions related to building and deploying to the robot.

Please share

@Daltz333 Daltz333 added the Good First Issue Good for newcomers label Mar 29, 2020
@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

Meant to compile a list of common issues and solutions related to building and deploying to the robot.

Is this only about build/deploy or also about code problems?
Do CAN problems (i.e CAN Recieve Timeout) count?

@Daltz333
Copy link
Member Author

I think code problems would also be acceptable. CAN is an icky situation as there is no CAN controller in the KOP

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

More with PCM/PDP issues, 99% of the times I encountered a CAN Recieve Timeout was because of PCM problems...

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

A troubleshooting section for simulation should also be made...

@Daltz333
Copy link
Member Author

There is an issue with extending simulation docs already. I usually get CAN Receive Timeout with TalonSRXs when there is an issue with the wiring.

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

CAN is an icky situation as there is no CAN controller in the KOP

What motor controllers are in the KOP? And I think these docs should have troubleshooting for everything except maybe extreme vendor stuff. And if the blink codes for the TalonSRX, etc. were added, why shouldn't basic troubleshooting be added too?

@AustinShalit
Copy link
Member

This past year the KOP motor controller was the Victor SPX. The reason why we do not include troubleshooting for vendor devices is because that was part of the arrangement we came to when we decided to split out vendor hardware from the library. We make exceptions for specific pieces of documentation. For example, the status light page is great because it is a single document that contains all of the status light codes.

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

This past year the KOP motor controller was the Victor SPX

And the VictorSPX isn't CAN?
I understand the decision that troubleshooting vendor products should not be in the main docs, basic CAN troubleshooting should be in the main docs as that is the direction FRC is going in, and it applies to products of most vendors and KOP equipment (PCM,PDP), if the latter isn't a reason itself.

@Daltz333
Copy link
Member Author

To be clear. We can include CAN devices. However, if we do anything with vendors, we have to mention them all.

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

Would we want a separate troubleshooting file for each "topic", or a single file with sections?

@Daltz333
Copy link
Member Author

I was thinking a section for each topic would be cleaner. It already exists in some topics. In specific, this issue relates to creating a FAQ of common deployment issues (network connection, null pointer exception, etc)

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

Where would this troubleshooting file be?

@Daltz333
Copy link
Member Author

And that is the hard question. It'd likely be somewhere in basic Programming

@jasondaming
Copy link
Member

I am starting a list of things that should go on here will update as more things come in:

  • No WPILib Install
  • CAN Recieve Timeout-Hardware Disconnected
  • CAN Recieve Timeout-PCM? Is this a location thing where it get noise from other systems?
  • CTRE Firmware not up to date
  • Motor Controller set up in a loop

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

Maybe search for keywords like "bug", "problem" etc in Chief Delphi? There seem to be people there that are very skilled in finding weird problems and bugs.
Also, look over support issues in allwpilib, frc-docs, and GradleRIO - multiple common problems have been reported there too.
I can help with some fixes, mostly concerning GradleRIO.

@AustinShalit
Copy link
Member

To prevent this from becoming a huge PR, maybe we can create a page with one or two things and then folks can PR additions as we see fit?

@Daltz333
Copy link
Member Author

Should we turn Known-Issues into this type of thing? I feel like permanent known issues should fall under this.

@jasondaming
Copy link
Member

I don't mind combining them. Would this be in a FAQ format?

@AustinShalit
Copy link
Member

I'd be worried that this document would get really long if we combine them. There is a difference between known issues that we intend to fix at some point and issues that users run into but there is nothing actionable we (WPILib) can do.

@jasondaming
Copy link
Member

I don't have a strong preference about combining I agree that separate does make some sense. Maybe they link to each other?

For this issue however do we want to structure it as a FAQ or just like a bulleted list of common problems people have?

I assume this goes under basic programming? That section is really becoming a catch all but I think there is another issue to address that.

@AustinShalit
Copy link
Member

@jasondaming What do you think (FAQ vs list)? And I think basic programming is fine for now until we figure out a long term solution.

@jasondaming
Copy link
Member

I think that a FAQ format is nice in that it many times is better at capturing the common things people would search for that just having an answer might not.

@Starlight220
Copy link
Member

Starlight220 commented Dec 15, 2020

Agree with that, many times it isn't clear what the problem is. FAQ format might help with that.

I think that issues should have a link to the gh issue tracking that problem, so teams can easily check the status of the problem.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants