> On Nov 9, 2021, at 10:26 AM, Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > wrote: > > Andrew, > > Agree that we want it to be very simple and walk up and use. > > There is no requirement to use Visual Studio Code. > > There are multiple ways available for use by developers > Visual Studio Code plugin. > Run uncrustify tool from command line. > Implement a githook that automatically runs uncrustify as part of local > commit. > If you look at bottom of this readme it describe how to integrate with Vim > and IntelliJ > https://github.com/uncrustify/uncrustify > <https://github.com/uncrustify/uncrustify> > > What is critical at this stage is identifying specific work items to complete > the source style conversion. Defining exactly “how we do it” is important > for success. Looks like your suggestion for the developer use case is a > download page that auto picks the right installer. >
I’d be OK if to start it just listed the various options, if making the button smart is too much work. Thanks, Andrew Fish > Best regards, > > Mike > > From: Andrew Fish <af...@apple.com> > Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 10:14 AM > To: edk2-devel-groups-io <devel@edk2.groups.io>; Kinney, Michael D > <michael.d.kin...@intel.com> > Cc: Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com>; Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com>; > Marvin Häuser <mhaeu...@posteo.de>; Michael Kubacki > <michael.kuba...@microsoft.com>; mikub...@linux.microsoft.com; > rebe...@nuviainc.com; Bret Barkelew <bret.barke...@microsoft.com> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Progress on getting Uncrustify working for EDK2? > > Mike, > > My main concern is there is an easy path for the developers. I don’t want to > have developers have to learn new development technologies just to run a > “required” tool. I’m not as concerned on how we do it. Hosting binaries from > a webpage that auto picks what to download would be fine with me. > > I think the important thing is we make this walkup an use, and we write up > the instructions not assuming “other knowledge”. > > My use case is probably uncommon. We don’t use brew, but there is an internal > brew we can use. So we generally just install build tools into our repo. We > are more flexible on personal productivity tools so I’d probably consider > switching to Visual Studio Code, especially if there was an Extension in the > Marketplace I could just click on to configure Code for edk2 development. On > the other hand nothing inspires hate like asking people to switch their > editor, so I don’t think we can depend on Code as the solution. > > Thanks, > > Andrew Fish > > > On Nov 9, 2021, at 7:08 AM, Michael D Kinney <michael.d.kin...@intel.com > <mailto:michael.d.kin...@intel.com>> wrote: > > Submodule within which repo? What would be the proposed location? > > Would a fork of uncrustify maintained as a repo under TianoCore work as well? > > There are CI checks (including extensive unit tests) and release generation > that are built into uncrustify repo and I do not know if those will be > functional if it is maintained as a submodule. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Leif Lindholm <l...@nuviainc.com <mailto:l...@nuviainc.com>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 9, 2021 4:37 AM > To: Gerd Hoffmann <kra...@redhat.com <mailto:kra...@redhat.com>> > Cc: devel@edk2.groups.io <mailto:devel@edk2.groups.io>; Kinney, Michael D > <michael.d.kin...@intel.com <mailto:michael.d.kin...@intel.com>>; Andrew Fish > <af...@apple.com <mailto:af...@apple.com>>; Marvin Häuser > <mhaeu...@posteo.de <mailto:mhaeu...@posteo.de>>; Michael Kubacki > <michael.kuba...@microsoft.com <mailto:michael.kuba...@microsoft.com>>; > mikub...@linux.microsoft.com <mailto:mikub...@linux.microsoft.com>; > rebe...@nuviainc.com <mailto:rebe...@nuviainc.com>; > Bret Barkelew <bret.barke...@microsoft.com > <mailto:bret.barke...@microsoft.com>> > Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] Progress on getting Uncrustify working for EDK2? > > On Tue, Nov 09, 2021 at 09:40:02 +0100, Gerd Hoffmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > 3. Require use of uncrustify tool before submitting patch review emails or > PRs. > * The required version would be a formally released version from the > fork maintained by Michael Kubacki until > the changes can be upstreamed. > > * https://dev.azure.com/projectmu/Uncrustify > <https://dev.azure.com/projectmu/Uncrustify> > > Can we please *first* get the changes merged to upstream uncrustify? > > That'll make the whole process much less painful because the usual > software repositories (linux distro packages, macos homebrew, ...) > can be used to install uncrustify then, and it's also less confusing if > developers don't have to juggle with different uncrustify variants > (upstream vs. edk2). > > Whilst I agree in principle... > > This means postponing automated coding style changes until 2023 > (Debian stable), 2025 (Ubuntu LTS), ??? (RHEL10), or even later > ... and I'd rather not. > > I like Marvin's suggestion of a submodule. Which we could drop once > no longer needed. > > / > Leif > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#83525): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/83525 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/84932137/21656 Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
