FPGA Central

OpenCores continues to grow rapidly and we are pleased to announce
that we have just passed 50,000 registered users. We have also noticed
a large increase in activity on the site, in both downloading cores/
projects and creation of new cores/projects.

Check out the latest newsletter from OpenCores with the link below:
http://www.opencores.org/?do=newsletter&2009=06

On Jul 2, 5:53*pm, OC-team <marcus.erlands...@gmail.com> wrote:
> OpenCores continues to grow rapidly and we are pleased to announce
> that we have just passed 50,000 registered users. We have also noticed
> a large increase in activity on the site, in both downloading cores/
> projects and creation of new cores/projects.
>
> Check out the latest newsletter from OpenCores with the link below:http://www.opencores.org/?do=newsletter&2009=06


I wonder how many of those "new registered users" are students
that have to sign up as part of a curse work, and will never
login in again.

What would be more interesting, would be to know how many
*active* participants there really are. And with active I mean
people who log in at least 3 times per week and upload project
files. I would also filter out the "active users" that only
participate in the forum discussions.

I get about a million hits to my web site every months, but I
guess half of those hits are looking for the shoe company "asics" ...

Cheers,
luudee

On Jul 4, 8:09*am, luudee <rudolf.usselm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 2, 5:53*pm, OC-team <marcus.erlands...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > OpenCores continues to grow rapidly and we are pleased to announce
> > that we have just passed 50,000 registered users. We have also noticed
> > a large increase in activity on the site, in both downloading cores/
> > projects and creation of new cores/projects.
>
> > Check out the latest newsletter from OpenCores with the link below:http://www.opencores.org/?do=newsletter&2009=06
>
> I wonder how many of those "new registered users" are students
> that have to sign up as part of a curse work, and will never
> login in again.
>
> What would be more interesting, would be to know how many
> *active* participants there really are. And with active I mean
> people who log in at least 3 times per week and upload project
> files. I would also filter out the "active users" that only
> participate in the forum discussions.
>
> I get about a million hits to my web site every months, but I
> guess half of those hits are looking for the shoe company "asics" ...
>
> Cheers,
> luudee

ORSOC will only publish BIG marketing numbers, like 50.000

the number of active projects,
where number of _weekly_ changes to IP sources is more then 3 times

well, I would be surprised if that number would be above 25
it is possible to confirm that if somebody makes some script to
analyze
the complete svn data

hm, 25:50000 is 1:2000
sounds about right, well maybe 25 is too much and should be less


Antti

Here are some interesting statistics:

I counted a total of

- 457 Projects
- 12 are NEW (not so bad !)

BUT, only 127 (about 1/3) are completed ! Some of the
not completed more than 5 years old ...

luudee

On Jul 4, 4:26*am, luudee <rudolf.usselm...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here are some interesting statistics:
>
> I counted a total of
>
> - 457 Projects
> - 12 are NEW (not so bad !)
>
> BUT, only 127 (about 1/3) are completed ! Some of the
> not completed more than 5 years old ...
>
> luudee

That is the single biggest issue with oc.org that I find, separating
the wheat from the chaff. Antti started on an effort to document
processor cores. In fact, I think I owe him a reply on that topic.

Rick

On Jul 4, 3:11*pm, rickman <gnu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jul 4, 4:26*am, luudee <rudolf.usselm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Here are some interesting statistics:
>
> > I counted a total of
>
> > - 457 Projects
> > - 12 are NEW (not so bad !)
>
> > BUT, only 127 (about 1/3) are completed ! Some of the
> > not completed more than 5 years old ...
>
> > luudee
>
> That is the single biggest issue with oc.org that I find, separating
> the wheat from the chaff. *Antti started on an effort to document
> processor cores. *In fact, I think I owe him a reply on that topic.
>
> Rick

Hi Rick,

I am still doing the "IP Core Report"...

i have plenty of cores that are not so known
hm, like X32! too bad i havent yet evaluated that one,
it does execute LCC bytecode in hardware !!

my evaluation in most cases is limited to the following
1) OotB Yes/No - if the design files pass synthesis/implementation
"Out of the Box" i.e. WITHOUT HDL modifications
(only minor tweaking is allowed like setting verilog include dir,
etc..)

2) if I need to spend more than 30 minutes and FAIL to get the HDL
code to pass synthesis, then my rank is "P o S"
in this category is as example PIC10 IP core, it has NICE webpage and
HDL code that just doesnt want to pass synthesis

if implementation passes, i just recored the slice/lut/ff/bram

then i add my commentary, etc etc..

Antti

I wonder to know how much guys that used to complain some free
service, nevertheless did use and still are using that service

cheers
Sandro

[email protected] wrote:
> I am still doing the "IP Core Report"...
The draft that I have seen last time was very very
interesting and encouraging. I hope that you
can fill all the blanks in the near future,
it can be a precious tool for many people.

> Antti
yg

--
http://ygdes.com / http://yasep.org

On Jul 4, 4:21*pm, Sandro <sdro...@netscape.net> wrote:
> I wonder to know how much guys that used to complain some free
> service, nevertheless did use and still are using that service
>
> cheers
> Sandro

Sandro

WHO is complaining?
and about what?

has some one here said something about FREE IP cores, and/or
developers?

the FIRST post was PURE ADVERTIZEMENT (for ORSOC.SE)

there are some replies, from two _contributors_ of opencores (luudee,
Antti the later in much lesser degree but still)

I am not sure if Rick has placed any of his ip cores to oc or not, but
I'd say he is in any case entitled to spell our some critical views
here.

it leaves, that the one that is complaining is you sandro?

spelling out things that could/should be improved isnt always
"complaining"...

Antti

On Jul 4, 5:58*pm, "Antti.Luk...@googlemail.com"
<Antti.Luk...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>...
> WHO is complaining?
> and about what?
>
> has some one here said something about FREE IP cores, and/or
> developers?

noone said that... did I ?

>
> the FIRST post was PURE ADVERTIZEMENT (for ORSOC.SE)

you are right


> there are some replies, from two _contributors_ of opencores (luudee,
> Antti the later in much lesser degree but still)

me too... ( then at least three _contributors_ ;-) )

> I am not sure if Rick has placed any of his ip cores to oc or not, but
> I'd say he is in any case entitled to spell our some critical views
> here.

noone said that... did I ?

>
> it leaves, that the one that is complaining is you sandro?

yes... I'm complaining about people are complaining... then
I'm complaining against myself too ;-)

>
> spelling out things that could/should be improved isnt always
> "complaining"...

right but... maybe wrong target! maybe is better to send
an e-mail to the opencores mantainers... isn't ?

Anyway I didn't want to hurt anyone...
if I did then my sincere excuse

Sandro

On Jul 4, 7:47*pm, Sandro <sdro...@netscape.net> wrote:
> On Jul 4, 5:58*pm, "Antti.Luk...@googlemail.com"
>
> <Antti.Luk...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >...
> > WHO is complaining?
> > and about what?
>
> > has some one here said something about FREE IP cores, and/or
> > developers?
>
> noone said that... did I ?
>
>
>
> > the FIRST post was PURE ADVERTIZEMENT (for ORSOC.SE)
>
> you are right
>
> > there are some replies, from two _contributors_ of opencores (luudee,
> > Antti the later in much lesser degree but still)
>
> me too... ( then at least three _contributors_ *;-) )
>
> > I am not sure if Rick has placed any of his ip cores to oc or not, but
> > I'd say he is in any case entitled to spell our some critical views
> > here.
>
> noone said that... did I ?
>
>
>
> > it leaves, that the one that is complaining is you sandro?
>
> yes... I'm complaining about people are complaining... then
> I'm complaining against myself too ;-)
>
>
>
> > spelling out things that could/should be improved isnt always
> > "complaining"...
>
> right but... maybe wrong target! maybe is better to send
> an e-mail to the opencores mantainers... isn't ?
>
> Anyway I didn't want to hurt anyone...
> if I did then my sincere excuse
>
> Sandro

welcome u r
(I should have guessed, actually i assumed that 2->3
the very instant i posted..)

it's not always possible to fix things in all places we see them,
some times just "bringing" up the issue may help, as those
who can (or should) fix the issue just arent aware of it.

well unfortunatly it looks like all that orsoc wants to fix
is the issue in their pockets. its a noble goal of course.

2 yg: yes, i think it will become something of a value
itself the report, already seeing things i did not know
(or wasnt so aware of)

Antti