Running into something that I think would either be a bug or something that should bring up a error or warning in the check sequence.
If you define several universes initially, say 1 to 16, with any number of channels per universe, say 510 for this example. Then I put a model with a starting value of Universe 1, channel 1 with 150 nodes everything is fine. Then I can copy that model 15 times and have a each start on their own universe and start channel, all on a separate port on something like a F16v3. All is good up to that point.
Now if I want to add 50 nodes to the first model, so it has a total of 200 nodes, it would spill over into a second universe. But since I already have a model starting on universe 2, channel 1 on my second port, I don't want to mess that up. So I add universe 20 (skipped ahead over 17-19 just to make this universe stand out). If I move this universe up in the setup tab so that is comes right after universe 1, it looks like it should work. The absolute channels are correct on both the setup tab and properly calculated on the layout tab (see attachment). However, I don't think a controller will know that universe 20 is supposed to come after universe 1, and be able to output that correctly. At least not in universe/start channel mode.
Likewise, say i removed all the other models except for that on port 1, but left my setup the same with it being universe 1, then universe 20, then universe 2. Then increase to 400 nodes. xLights again will calculate the end channel correctly, as Universe 2, Channel 180 or absolute channel 1200. But I don't think you can set a controller to know that universe 20 is between universes 1 and 2 like that, again at least not in universe start/channel mode.
Things get even more confusing if you were to set the model to start on Universe 20, channel 1. It would then end on a universe with a lower count than the initial one. Again, xlights seems to handle that just fine. I just don't think any of the controllers can handle that.
So was thinking that might be something worth flagging in the check sequence. This is something I know how to get around and revise to accommodate without a problem. Just thinking of those that aren't familiar with how this works could be causing themselves to have a problem and not realize it.
Thanks.
Jon