search

QUB-ASL / bzzz

Quadcopter with ESP32 and RaspberryPi
MIT License
7 stars 1 forks source link

Refuse to fly unless the switches are at the correct positions #110

Closed alphaville closed 8 months ago

alphaville commented 1 year ago

Additional safety measure: The quadcopter should refuse to fly when the script starts unless the switches are at the correct positions (A: up, B: up, C: first position, D: down) and the throttle stick is fully down. In fact the buzzer should make a sound. Since we can control the buzzer only from the ESP, it should be good to implement this on the ESP.

alphaville commented 1 year ago

@gunturiCM will you take care of this?

alphaville commented 10 months ago

@jamie-54 @Yuanbwcx @Runway27 @pdavid747 @Minanchi We should take care of this issue before we start flying again to avoid accidents! Who can take care of this?

alphaville commented 10 months ago

@jamie-54 @Yuanbwcx @Runway27 @pdavid747 @Minanchi folks, I still haven't received any replies from you on this. Who can take care of this issue?

jamie-54 commented 10 months ago

me and @Runway27 can look at this tomorrow

alphaville commented 8 months ago

@jamie-54 and @Runway27 - should we close this issue?

Runway27 commented 8 months ago

Yes sir, this issue has been resolved. But the PR regarding this has issue #165 which is to be resolved.

alphaville commented 8 months ago

Indeed, PR #172 is addressing two issues (#110 and #165), but this is not good practice. A PR should aim to close one issue (even when it partly addresses multiple ones). In any case, #172 still has unresolved conversations and has not been approved.

I suggest we make PR #172 address only #110, we then review it quickly, we merge it, and we open a PR to work on #165. Does this work, @Runway27 and @jamie-54?

Runway27 commented 8 months ago

Yes sir, we can do that.

jamie-54 commented 8 months ago

Indeed, PR #172 is addressing two issues (#110 and #165), but this is not good practice. A PR should aim to close one issue (even when it partly addresses multiple ones). In any case, #172 still has unresolved conversations and has not been approved.

I suggest we make PR #172 address only #110, we then review it quickly, we merge it, and we open a PR to work on #165. Does this work, @Runway27 and @jamie-54?

Sounds good

Runway27 commented 8 months ago

Are we happy to close this issue?

jamie-54 commented 8 months ago

Are we happy to close this issue? Yea sounds good to me