PCSX-Reloaded to become PCSX-df?

May 16, 2010 at 12:04 PM
Edited May 18, 2010 at 1:13 AM

Following the discussion with adburton (the current active developer of pcsx-df) he switched the PCSX-df codebase to PCSX-Reloaded and is currently working on migrating his new GUI code to the current PCSX-Reloaded codebase.

I think it could be a good idea to merge with PCSX-df (and add existing pcsxr developers into pcsx-df project), which is an older project and is what pcsxr is started from :) And their new GUI code is much cleaner than the current glade-based code, which could be worthy (although still needs some polish & debugging).

I also would like to get rid of Codeplex, which has some bad designs such as the patch tracker which does not allow discussion at all and the revision number which makes no sense (oops, it was a mistake).

Still though, it could be a long time to get the migration of GUI code done (and be stable & usable enough). Before that's done it could be a better to keep pcsxr project alive rather than switching at a rush, and make a final release when it's a good time to switch.

If anyone has any idea or disagrees, please let me know :)

May 16, 2010 at 4:32 PM

The new GUI is based on Qt or wxWidgets ? I think that would be better if the new gui code can be cross-platform.

May 16, 2010 at 9:47 PM

I do not like the name - pcsx-df. Also I do not like Qt/wxWidgets. :/

May 18, 2010 at 1:11 AM
Edited May 18, 2010 at 3:32 AM

well it isn't based on qt or wxwidgets - still GTK-based but has been rewritten in a cleaner way.

yeah the name pcsx-df definately does not sound "cool" (although not a problem for me)... will talk to them to see what can be done with that :(
still though, pcsx-df does sound more "professional" than "pcsx-reloaded" I think :)

May 18, 2010 at 9:12 AM

I'm not particularly attached to the name, apart from it having been used for a few years. But I am happy to take suggestions ;)

To be honest, I can't even remember what -df stands for!

I'm not planning on using QT or wxWidgets - I don't think cross-platform widgets look great and in any event there is always platform-specific HIG standards to adhere to... otherwise the apps look out of place.

May 19, 2010 at 3:18 AM

pcsxr, pcsx-mess. :))

I don't know, as you wish.

The main thing is not delayed for long.

May 28, 2010 at 7:58 AM

PCSX-Fusion, PCSX-Rewrite.

Jun 1, 2010 at 10:45 PM
PCSX1, PCSXone, PCS1, PCSone, PCPS, PCPS1, PCPSone, etc.
Jun 8, 2010 at 9:03 AM

How about something that's not a rehash of the rather-clumsy-to-pronounce PCSX? Perhaps a word? One that I had in mind was "enos", after one of the original PSX marketing slogans (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation#Slogans).

In any event, I think it's worth breaking from the PCSX naming convention... if people are really attached, perhaps "Pisiex" as a pronouncement of "PCSX".

Jun 9, 2010 at 2:11 AM
Edited Jun 9, 2010 at 5:05 AM

well I'm actually fine with pcsx-df (df = debian fork I think).

not labeling it as pcsx can be a good idea as long as proper credits are given - I already seen some ppl confuse pcsx-r with the original pcsx (or pcsx2) and compare this mess with Windows version of epsxe (rather than original pcsx or pcsx-df) on some forums :(

anyways I'm not really good at naming so I'll leave the decision to others :)

still though, as edgbla noted above - spending too much time on this isn't a good idea however :)

Jul 27, 2010 at 5:02 PM
Edited Jul 27, 2010 at 5:08 PM

I was wondering what the development and release plans were for pcsx-r. Is there still work being done to re-write the root counters and fix bugs throughout the emulator that would improve compatibility? Recently the focus seems to be getting builds running on many different platforms.

What are the current priorities for pcsx-r development, and which parts of the emulator need help to improve compatibility?

This thread is talking about merging back to pcsx-df. Are there any thoughts of merging the arm core and other improvements from psx4all back into pcsx-r/pcsx-df?

Aug 4, 2010 at 11:19 AM
as for compatibility issues, maybe one of the parts is the timing (current way is too inaccurate)... anyway I'm not really familiar with the psx hardware (except the parts already well-documented). I have no plan to merge the arm dynarec core as it would not be very feasible to do something which I don't have the actual hardware to run on.