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

Enhancement -- Adding two new mash types #205

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Mar 5, 2016

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@mikfire
Contributor

mikfire commented Mar 3, 2016

This is an enhancement I've been working on for a while, but I think I finally got it right. I've added two new mash types: batchSparge and flySparge. The are considered by most of the code as infusion steps (which they basically are), but they do behave a little differently -- batchSparge assumes you've emptied the mash tun for example, and adding a flySparge step does not allow you to continue.

This should also close the issue #63

Mik Firestone added some commits Apr 25, 2014

Mik Firestone mik
First step for new mash type
The ground work is in place, but I seem to have broken something pretty
seriously in the mash designer. Commiting this so I can double check against
the master.

Second pass at doing this. The old branch was too old.
mikfire
Another try at more mash types
I tried to merge the old branch, had over 3k changes and came to my senses. I
am apparently better at cherry picking then I am at merging. Who knew?

I found my original problem in maxAmt_l, which was doing too much based on the
mash type.

I've tweeked the signals a little to make mash designer more responsive.

Now to figure out what fly sparging does and means.
mikfire
Small fixes and some ideas on the fly sparge
I fixed the volume problem. As I somewhat expected, it was a side effect of
disabling the signals. The fix was to add a method to figure volume lost
to the grain. There are still some oddities, but it seems to do the right
thing.

Started playing with the fly sparge settings a little. It will get more into
the brewing methods idea I have, but curently you can't add another step after
you select "fly sparge". I am going to continue working the idea, but this is
the start.
Mik Firestone
Some ideas on how to use a new mashtype
Probably should have waited until the first request was merged, but I had an
idea. The mash wizard now has a few extra options -- no sparge, batch sparge
and fly sparge. Depending on the option you select, brewtarget does different
things. You can also select the number of batch sparges.

I will set up a new options panel to set the defaults for this. But first I
need to merge/sync this vm with upstream.
@rocketman768

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rocketman768

rocketman768 Mar 5, 2016

Member

There are some conflicts to resolve

$ git fetch upstream
$ git merge upstream/develop
...carefully fix conflicts...
$ git push origin feature/newmashtypev2
Member

rocketman768 commented Mar 5, 2016

There are some conflicts to resolve

$ git fetch upstream
$ git merge upstream/develop
...carefully fix conflicts...
$ git push origin feature/newmashtypev2
@mikfire

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mikfire

mikfire Mar 5, 2016

Contributor

Did that work? For reasons that escape me, I do not grok git conflict resolution.

Contributor

mikfire commented Mar 5, 2016

Did that work? For reasons that escape me, I do not grok git conflict resolution.

@rocketman768

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@rocketman768

rocketman768 Mar 5, 2016

Member

The merge commit looks good. Seems that the conflicts were some pretty trivial stuff in database.h/cpp?

Member

rocketman768 commented Mar 5, 2016

The merge commit looks good. Seems that the conflicts were some pretty trivial stuff in database.h/cpp?

rocketman768 added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2016

Merge pull request #205 from mikfire/feature/newmashtypev2
Enhancement -- Adding two new mash types

@rocketman768 rocketman768 merged commit b991523 into Brewtarget:develop Mar 5, 2016

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@mikfire

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@mikfire

mikfire Mar 5, 2016

Contributor

Yeah. The postgresql changes moved some bits around, and this change added
a new parameter in the same places in the header. The conflict in the cpp
file was even more trivial.

I thought I had synced my master branch to the development branch, but
apparently hadn't.

Mik
On Mar 5, 2016 18:28, "Philip Lee" notifications@github.com wrote:

The merge commit looks good. Seems that the conflicts were some pretty
trivial stuff in database.c/cpp?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#205 (comment)
.

Contributor

mikfire commented Mar 5, 2016

Yeah. The postgresql changes moved some bits around, and this change added
a new parameter in the same places in the header. The conflict in the cpp
file was even more trivial.

I thought I had synced my master branch to the development branch, but
apparently hadn't.

Mik
On Mar 5, 2016 18:28, "Philip Lee" notifications@github.com wrote:

The merge commit looks good. Seems that the conflicts were some pretty
trivial stuff in database.c/cpp?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#205 (comment)
.

@mikfire mikfire deleted the mikfire:feature/newmashtypev2 branch May 26, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment