> Have a few custom boards in the test process. we're talking build > testing, not runtime. No need for a farm.
We actually should do this. It should be possible to have a few custom boards in another repository (the old testing repo for instance) and trigger its workflow on PRs. I believe once Greg suggested to use a special sim config with the necessary custom options enabled, if that work that would be simpler. However, I'm not sure if we can test all the possible configurations like this, for example we have boards with common folder, boards with no common folder and boards with common but the user doesn't want the common folder. Either way, we should do something about custom boards to avoid any breakage. Regarding testing in hardware, what we have right now is different organisations doing their own tests on their own infrastructure. In most cases, this means that we wait until the change is already in master. For us (as in Espressif) we sometimes push branches internally with the changes of some PRs that we think require more tests. I don't know how we can setup hardware test runners with Apache infrastructure, the best thing we can do is to have QEMU for most chips. This is a bit out of topic, sorry about this Jukka, we can move this discussion to a different thread if you want. Regarding code review, please remember that _anyone_ in the community can participate, it doesn't have to be a commiter or PPMC member. If a concern is raised by anyone, the corresponding PR will have to wait until everything is addressed. So if you guys have some spare time, you can check PRs of interest, you don't have to go through all the commits of all the PRs, any help is appreciated. On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 2:51 PM Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> wrote: > > Sorry, I cant possibly test every commit and tell you what breaks > > Have a few custom boards in the test process. we're talking build > testing, not runtime. No need for a farm. > > I am not actively developing in nuttx. I'm just using it. > > > Your request is ONLY possible for contributors working on NuttX full > time on the very long term. > > It's not my situation. Following the github feeds would result in > massive amounts of commit "spam" to read, sort, review, delete. sorry > not possible given the amount of commits by certains companies and > various topics. > > But still I see the project evolving with fear and tbh, because at some > point I'll have to work on a new board (it's planned). > > > I am not here to rant more. These were feelings and of course it's > biased. I was just adding my voice to Jukka's concerns. > > > Sebastien > > > > > Le 28/03/2022 à 14:03, Alan Carvalho de Assis a écrit : > > On 3/28/22, Sebastien Lorquet <sebast...@lorquet.fr> wrote: > >> In this example it's Xiaomi and Sony. > >> > >> NuttX has a code review problem and it has to be identified and addressed. > >> > >> I have the same feeling here, last time I tried to send a pull request, > >> it took several day to fix style issues for a ONE LINE code typo. > >> > > Most probably you didn't follow the process to verify for code style errors > > etc: > > https://nuttx.apache.org/docs/latest/contributing/making-changes.html#git-workflow-with-an-upstream-repository > > > >> And a lot of board breaking changes are committed regularly. when you > >> have a custom board it's not fun. > >> > > Please help us to test! We don't have CI with a board farm test to help us. > > > >> I believe a LOT of things including new features happens "silently" in > >> github comments only, and very little is discussed on this mailing list. > >> > > This mailing list purpose it not for code reviewing, but you can > > subscribe on github or apache repository to receive an email with each > > PR and with each comment other people are doing. > > > > We need more people to review the code, not more people to complain! > > > > BR, > > > > Alan
