nuttxpr commented on PR #16127: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/16127#issuecomment-2774913476
[**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues) Yes, this PR appears to meet the NuttX requirements, although it could be improved. Here's a breakdown and suggestions: **Strengths:** * **Clear Summary:** The summary explains the "why," "what," and "how" of the change. The mention of future PRs provides valuable context. * **Addresses Impact:** The impact section covers all the required points. * **Provides Testing Information:** Testing information is provided, including the specific configuration and test performed. **Weaknesses & Suggestions:** * **Missing Issue References:** If this relates to any open issues, those should be linked in the Summary. Even if there isn't a directly related issue, consider creating one to track the overall effort of separating espnow pktradio from wlan and adding support for other ESP32 chips. This helps with traceability and project management. * **Incomplete Testing Logs:** While the testing *description* is good, the actual logs are missing. Include snippets of logs demonstrating successful operation before and after the change. This provides concrete evidence of functionality. * **Impact on User Needs More Detail:** While it mentions the Kconfig change, it doesn't explain *how* users should update their config files. Provide a specific example of the old config setting and the new one. E.g., "Users will need to change `CONFIG_ESP32_ESPNOW_PKTRADIO=y` to `CONFIG_ESPRESSIF_ESPNOW_PKTRADIO=y` in their defconfig files." * **Consider Documentation Impact:** Even if no documentation updates are *required*, consider whether a small addition to the relevant documentation section would be *beneficial* to explain this new configuration option and its broader applicability. If so, mention it here and consider including a documentation update in the PR. If not, explicitly state "No documentation update is required or provided because..." to demonstrate conscious consideration. * **"FYI" is not formal review:** Tagging @tmedicci for information is good, but ensure a formal review is requested through the PR process. **In short:** The PR is on the right track, but adding the missing logs, clarifying the user impact, and considering documentation would significantly strengthen it. Linking related issues is highly recommended for traceability. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@nuttx.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
