> Perhaps I would limit this to larger commits only (and all affecting
Build / Kernel / common arch code of course). GitHub bot tells you the
size of the pull request, so we can draw some line according to that.
And maybe it could also automatically set the mandatory number of
reviewers. This way s
Hi Tomek,
another important change is that PRs should only touch one area.
In the past it was common for developers to submit PR with arch, documentation
and board commits
If we aim to start the LTS releases, from now we should request that they send
several PRs
Best regards
Alin
_
> Quite the opposite :-) Testing few boards multiple times in the same
by different people may be a bit of waste, but its more about anyone
providing what they have at hand and I am sure different people from
around the world will have different boards, more people more boards
coverage, and we will
Hi,
On 06/02/2025 10:00, raiden00pl wrote:
Chips with the same architecture use the same code,
so when we test a more advanced chip, we also test the code for a less
advanced chip.
Same code on slightly different chips is interesting because it
underpins the least documented differences betwe
Hi Tomek,
thanks for taking the lead on summarizing the changes so that we can vote them
I would propose that we refine the review requirement and demand less reviews
for boards and areas that have limited scope while increasing the number for
common areas that have a wider scope : ex arch, driv
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 10:01 AM raiden00pl wrote:
> Testing everything as a final goal is OK, but right now it's a waste of
> resources.
We are thinking ahead, planning, so anyone can attach whatever they
want / have / can port tests to, not to assume limits right from start
:-)
Yes we will star
I have:
* SAMA5D2 (Arm Cortex-A) Xplained EV board
* SAMA5D27-SOM1 EV board
* Custom board with SAMA5D27C-1G (128Mybte SDRAM) with TFT+TS, NOR
flash, SPI peripherals, I2C peripherals, USB, GPIO. All using NuttX
drivers.
I need to finish the project I'm on (which is still a few months' w
I can test
-nucleo-H743ZI (MB1137 B-01)
-nucleo-H743ZI2
-STM32F492I-disco (MB1075 B-01 it has peripherals and external RAM)
-STM32L1 discovery (MP963 C)
-ESP32 devkit
-raspberry pi pico
-raspberry pi pico 2
-our custom boards using STM32F429, STM32H743ZI
I will consider acquiring more boa
Tomek,
Regarding this pull request:I'm trying to test it quickly on our
STM32F427 based board, I cant pull the jtag probe before monday.
I have checked out the apache_8 branch of
https://github.com/hujun260/nuttx/tree/apache_8
-the tools/process_config.sh file is still broken, I could work
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 9:30 AM raiden00pl wrote:
> >On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 8:45 AM Michal Lenc wrote:
> > Perhaps I would limit this to larger commits only (and all affecting
> Build / Kernel / common arch code of course). GitHub bot tells you the
> size of the pull request, so we can draw some l
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 10:20 AM alin.jerpe...@sony.com
wrote:
> I would propose that we refine the review requirement and demand less reviews
> for boards and areas that have limited scope while increasing the number for
> common areas that have a wider scope : ex arch, drivers, frameworks. In m
On 2025-02-06 18:48:18, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 4:51 PM wrote:
> > On 2025-02-06 08:43:34, Michal Lenc wrote:
> > > > Also it will be nice to have monthly online meetings just to talk
> > > > things over and stay connected and synchronized. It should bring
> > > > community clo
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 7:50 PM wrote:
> > One word answer: electron.
No more explanation needed :D
I use discord over web browser.. just like the rest of js crap :-P
> > And mandatory link because IRC was mentioned: https://xkcd.com/1254/
> I made a mistake, it was supposed to be this one :P ht
On 2025-02-06 19:47:28, michal.lyszc...@bofc.pl wrote:
> On 2025-02-06 18:48:18, Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 4:51 PM wrote:
> > > On 2025-02-06 08:43:34, Michal Lenc wrote:
> > > > > Also it will be nice to have monthly online meetings just to talk
> > > > > things over and stay
I've got:
- Raspberry Pi Pico
- Raspberry Pi Pico W
- XIAO RP2040
- XIAO SAMD21
- Raspberry Pi 4B
And would also be willing to help test, provided it's easy enough for me to
automate.
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 2:33 PM Tiago Medicci Serrano <
tiago.medi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I wonder if tha
Hi!
I wonder if that be really bad if we added miminal citest / selftes to
> default configurations? Or this should stay minimal?
I think one `citest` defconfig is totally different from the minimal
configs. A minimal config is intended to be used by a user experimenting
with NuttX and `citest`
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 4:10 PM Alan C. Assis wrote:
> * If one person approves a PR and no other reviews or objections after a
> week, the person who approved the PR can assume a "lazy consensus" and go
> ahead and merge.
Im not sure if this is safe. We can always ask for request directly
from gi
Hi!
* if after a week the pull request does not have the required approvals,
> the issue is brought on the mailing list for further discussion.
Particularly, I don't like the idea of "lazy consensus" too. I think we can
try to actively ask for more reviewers (in the list and on GH).
I dont unde
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 4:51 PM wrote:
> On 2025-02-06 08:43:34, Michal Lenc wrote:
> > > Also it will be nice to have monthly online meetings just to talk
> > > things over and stay connected and synchronized. It should bring
> > > community closer together :-)
> >
> > Yes! We have to find a prope
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 4:55 PM Matteo Golin wrote:
> If I may add to the proposed contributing guideline changes: all changes
> affecting behaviour/APIs or adding features should be properly documented,
> not just within the PR. NuttX has many features and lots of apps for using
> them, but a lot
Hi!
Boards I Have
I have at least two units of each supported Espressif SoC that can be
allocated for testing:
- ESP32
- ESP32-S2
- ESP32-S3
- ESP32-C3
- ESP32-C6
- ESP32-H2
DRUNX Proposal (at least for the first efforts)
That being said, I propose to start testing the `citest` defconfig (and,
Folks, Alan noticed there is already project named drunx :-(
https://github.com/alxolr/drunx
..and the name is not really serious :D For me its just a working
slur, so if you have a better idea for name please share :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
+1
- We need more and better documentation!
- We need to keep existing documentation up to date after modifications.
I think all reviewers should pay attention to it and have the courage to
ask it to the PR author (I know it is kind of uncomfortable to ask for, but
we need to do it for the quali
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 7:00 PM Tiago Medicci Serrano
wrote:
> Hi!
> Boards I Have
> I have at least two units of each supported Espressif SoC that can be
> allocated for testing:
> - ESP32
> - ESP32-S2
> - ESP32-S3
> - ESP32-C3
> - ESP32-C6
> - ESP32-H2
Thanks Tiago, noted! :-)
> DRUNX Proposal
I think we can ask people to suggest some names and we can select the best
name.
Something to keep in mind about this distributed (build) system:
Not everyone has free electricity (solar panels) to run a computer server
24/7. And a solution where the server owner only runs it occasionally won't
h
Hello,
If I may add to the proposed contributing guideline changes: all changes
affecting behaviour/APIs or adding features should be properly documented,
not just within the PR. NuttX has many features and lots of apps for using
them, but a lot of them are left undocumented outside of inline comm
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 11:25 AM Sebastien Lorquet wrote:
> I can test (..)
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 11:40 AM Tim Hardisty wrote:
> I have: (..)
Noted! TANK U =)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 10:02 PM Matteo Golin wrote:
> I've got:
> - Raspberry Pi Pico
> - Raspberry Pi Pico W
> - XIAO RP2040
> - XIAO SAMD21
> - Raspberry Pi 4B
> And would also be willing to help test, provided it's easy enough for me to
> automate.
Thanks Matteo! Our board base is growing :-)
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 7:30 PM Alan C. Assis wrote:
> Something to keep in mind about this distributed (build) system:
> Not everyone has free electricity (solar panels) to run a computer server
> 24/7. And a solution where the server owner only runs it occasionally won't
> help.
> So we need to h
Empty Message
Hi Tomek,
thanks for taking the initiative
I can put at least
Spresense
RP 2040
RP4b
Best regards
Alin
On Fri, 7 Feb 2025, 02:54 Tomek CEDRO, wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 7:30 PM Alan C. Assis wrote:
> > Something to keep in mind about this distributed (build) system:
> > Not everyone ha
Hi Tomek,
You missed that rule:
* If one person approves a PR and no other reviews or objections after a
week, the person who approved the PR can assume a "lazy consensus" and go
ahead and merge.
BR,
Alan
On Thu, Feb 6, 2025 at 12:46 AM Tomek CEDRO wrote:
> Hello world :-)
>
> We have long d
Hello Alan, and Tomek,
Is this a good rule?
I have the feeling that any pull request could come with unexpected
problems, and if no one reviews it, it does not mean that the problems
are going away.
As suggested by anchao in previous emails, this is what happened in the
spinlock issue. No o
On 2025-02-06 08:43:34, Michal Lenc wrote:
> > Also it will be nice to have monthly online meetings just to talk
> > things over and stay connected and synchronized. It should bring
> > community closer together :-)
>
> Yes! We have to find a proper channel for this though. I think there
> were
34 matches
Mail list logo
