Hi as a best practice instead of forking a project and maintaining it you should try to upstream the needed patches do that the project can be built on top of NuttX.
For reference you can check how microPython or circuit python are built on top of NuttX without the need of forking the code https://www.adafruitdaily.com/2019/10/29/circuitpython-snakes-its-way-to-the-sony-spresense-sparkfun-qwiic-micro-and-arduino-nano-33-ble-sense-python-adafruit-circuitpython-pythonhardware-circuitpython-micropython-thepsf-adafruit/ This way each project shares the maintenance on the parts that belong to it Regards Alin On Mon, Feb 10, 2020 at 4:53 PM Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> How about we host the active project porting on github.com/nuttx? so > >>> the community could share the work. > >> The ideal solution would be to have the Pahu MQTT support NuttX natively > >> in their code. Then you do not have to port it at all. We don't want > >> responsibility for maintaining forks of other people's code. It is a > >> large effort that takes a lifetime commitment. We have never done a > >> good job trying that in the past. > > i agree it's ideal. > > is there a "canonical" way for a software to have native nuttx support? > > like having the top-level "debian" directory for debian packaging stuff. > > You should talk to Alan Carvalho de Assis. It has been his dream for a > long time to get a NuttX package building system (like the original > Buildroot or OpenEmbedded) for NuttX. The apps/ directory build > framework might be a starting point but I don't think anyone has done > anything like that other than just talk about what a good idea it is. > > > >
