Re: Question regarding an open project and documentation enhancement
I have send patches regarding addition of FAQ page in user/quick-start section of docs . Here I had to make extra links in 7.5 autoconf-migrations ,1.2 features,3.1 project support and corrected the link in https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/user/bld/index.html#commands . In 2nd patch I moved questions of https://docs.rtems.org/branches/master/user/support/contrib.html#common-questions-and-answers from 3.3 Contributing section to FAQ page. On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 9:46 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:08 AM Ayushman Mishra > wrote: > > > > Sorry for the delay (actually I was little busy due to my semester > > examination) and extremely sorry for my previous behaviour > > > > I have created a frequently asked questions (FAQ) page under > > quick-start section in user guide according to the ticket > > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3958 . I have attached an image of how > > the page looks after build up, and will send a patch for it as soon as > > possible ( currently some links are not working correctly) . Most of > > the questions are from https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/TBR/Website/FAQ > > but I am also writing a few questions of my own (like about .waf and > > autoconf build up) > > > Great. Maybe, start with the patch to add the new FAQ section to the > docs, and a second patch to migrate the contents from the Trac, and > then a third patch to add some more questions. > > > Also I wanted to take https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4334 (Replace > > Mongoose with Civitweb) as a GSOC project as I have huge interest in > > networking related projects but lack experience in it. I would be very > > grateful to know more about this project. > > > This is a good project also. Note there is a typo in the ticket title, > the project is called Civetweb; I fixed the ticket typos. For this > project, during the proposal preparation phase you should get RTEMS > working with a networking stack and able to run the existing mongoose > webserver (mghttpd) would be a very good start. I would suggest you > start a new thread to discuss this project, and to ask for more > guidance there. > > Gedare > > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:28 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:11 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:08 AM Ayushman Mishra > > > > wrote: > > > >> > > > >> 1. Hello everyone, I went through open ticket "Code Formatting and > > > >> Style Check for RTEMS score" (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) as > > > >> a possible GSOC project and discussion thread on it > > > >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057246.html, > > > >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057057.html . > > > >> But most of the threads on this project are almost a year old , I > > > >> wanted to know has there been any recent development on this project > > > >> and is there any specific tool developed/under-development for it. I > > > >> would be grateful to connect with mentor of this project in-order to > > > >> know more about the complexity involved and resources available for > > > >> it. > > > > > > > > > > > > As Sebastian said, it hasn't had any recent work but still needs > > > > attention. > > > > I think we have a first candidate style description and tool but it has > > > > not > > > > been checked against the code to see what differences exist between the > > > > RTEMS style and the generated style. These differences could be because > > > > the formatting specification to the tool needs tweaking, the input > > > > RTEMS code > > > > didn't follow the rules before, or we could need to consider changing > > > > our style > > > > rules. > > > > > > > > The score/src directory is thought to be the one of the ones which would > > > > follow the RTEMS style most consistently. Focusing there should help > > > > establish a baseline style, scripts, and change recommendations. > > > > > > > > Style adherence also has to be accounted for as part of the patch review > > > > and git commit process. Hopefully it can be automated. > > > > > > > > Taking a broad view of this could be a good GSoC project. At least I > > > > think there is enough programming in it to count as one. > > > > > > > Yes, this can be a GSoC project. > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> 2. Also I checked the issue #3958 https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3958 > > > >> , fixed some of the broken links of FAQ page but few of the answers I > > > >> got were from sites other than user guide. I would like to create a > > > >> separate FAQ page in user-guide having some of answers available there > > > >> only and some available as links. > > > > > > > > > > > > As a general rule, a lot of what is in the Wiki should be in regular > > > > documentation > > > > at docs.rtems.org. A lot has been converted, some in the wiki is > > > > already in the > > > > documentation but has not been checked for consistency in the > > > > conversion. > > > > > > > >
Re: Question regarding an open project and documentation enhancement
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 10:08 AM Ayushman Mishra wrote: > > Sorry for the delay (actually I was little busy due to my semester > examination) and extremely sorry for my previous behaviour > > I have created a frequently asked questions (FAQ) page under > quick-start section in user guide according to the ticket > https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3958 . I have attached an image of how > the page looks after build up, and will send a patch for it as soon as > possible ( currently some links are not working correctly) . Most of > the questions are from https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/TBR/Website/FAQ > but I am also writing a few questions of my own (like about .waf and > autoconf build up) > Great. Maybe, start with the patch to add the new FAQ section to the docs, and a second patch to migrate the contents from the Trac, and then a third patch to add some more questions. > Also I wanted to take https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/4334 (Replace > Mongoose with Civitweb) as a GSOC project as I have huge interest in > networking related projects but lack experience in it. I would be very > grateful to know more about this project. > This is a good project also. Note there is a typo in the ticket title, the project is called Civetweb; I fixed the ticket typos. For this project, during the proposal preparation phase you should get RTEMS working with a networking stack and able to run the existing mongoose webserver (mghttpd) would be a very good start. I would suggest you start a new thread to discuss this project, and to ask for more guidance there. Gedare > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 10:28 PM Gedare Bloom wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:11 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:08 AM Ayushman Mishra > > > wrote: > > >> > > >> 1. Hello everyone, I went through open ticket "Code Formatting and > > >> Style Check for RTEMS score" (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) as > > >> a possible GSOC project and discussion thread on it > > >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057246.html, > > >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057057.html . > > >> But most of the threads on this project are almost a year old , I > > >> wanted to know has there been any recent development on this project > > >> and is there any specific tool developed/under-development for it. I > > >> would be grateful to connect with mentor of this project in-order to > > >> know more about the complexity involved and resources available for > > >> it. > > > > > > > > > As Sebastian said, it hasn't had any recent work but still needs > > > attention. > > > I think we have a first candidate style description and tool but it has > > > not > > > been checked against the code to see what differences exist between the > > > RTEMS style and the generated style. These differences could be because > > > the formatting specification to the tool needs tweaking, the input RTEMS > > > code > > > didn't follow the rules before, or we could need to consider changing our > > > style > > > rules. > > > > > > The score/src directory is thought to be the one of the ones which would > > > follow the RTEMS style most consistently. Focusing there should help > > > establish a baseline style, scripts, and change recommendations. > > > > > > Style adherence also has to be accounted for as part of the patch review > > > and git commit process. Hopefully it can be automated. > > > > > > Taking a broad view of this could be a good GSoC project. At least I > > > think there is enough programming in it to count as one. > > > > > Yes, this can be a GSoC project. > > > > >> > > >> > > >> 2. Also I checked the issue #3958 https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3958 > > >> , fixed some of the broken links of FAQ page but few of the answers I > > >> got were from sites other than user guide. I would like to create a > > >> separate FAQ page in user-guide having some of answers available there > > >> only and some available as links. > > > > > > > > > As a general rule, a lot of what is in the Wiki should be in regular > > > documentation > > > at docs.rtems.org. A lot has been converted, some in the wiki is already > > > in the > > > documentation but has not been checked for consistency in the conversion. > > > > > > This is not a GSoC task by the program rules but if you have spotted > > > something > > > that is in both, we would like to resolve it. File a ticket saying wiki > > > page X and > > > documentation section Y are the same and that you double checked it. Then > > > someone with permissions can delete the page. This really is appreciated. > > > I > > > have done a LOT of pages but there are more to go. > > > > > > For example, I think almost all of the patch process and git instructions > > > have > > > been added to the docs but are still in the Wiki. There may be a section > > > that > > > remains to be converted but it needs review, missing content added to the > > > docs, > > > and
Re: Question regarding an open project and documentation enhancement
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:11 AM Joel Sherrill wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:08 AM Ayushman Mishra > wrote: >> >> 1. Hello everyone, I went through open ticket "Code Formatting and >> Style Check for RTEMS score" (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) as >> a possible GSOC project and discussion thread on it >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057246.html, >> https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057057.html . >> But most of the threads on this project are almost a year old , I >> wanted to know has there been any recent development on this project >> and is there any specific tool developed/under-development for it. I >> would be grateful to connect with mentor of this project in-order to >> know more about the complexity involved and resources available for >> it. > > > As Sebastian said, it hasn't had any recent work but still needs attention. > I think we have a first candidate style description and tool but it has not > been checked against the code to see what differences exist between the > RTEMS style and the generated style. These differences could be because > the formatting specification to the tool needs tweaking, the input RTEMS code > didn't follow the rules before, or we could need to consider changing our > style > rules. > > The score/src directory is thought to be the one of the ones which would > follow the RTEMS style most consistently. Focusing there should help > establish a baseline style, scripts, and change recommendations. > > Style adherence also has to be accounted for as part of the patch review > and git commit process. Hopefully it can be automated. > > Taking a broad view of this could be a good GSoC project. At least I > think there is enough programming in it to count as one. > Yes, this can be a GSoC project. >> >> >> 2. Also I checked the issue #3958 https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3958 >> , fixed some of the broken links of FAQ page but few of the answers I >> got were from sites other than user guide. I would like to create a >> separate FAQ page in user-guide having some of answers available there >> only and some available as links. > > > As a general rule, a lot of what is in the Wiki should be in regular > documentation > at docs.rtems.org. A lot has been converted, some in the wiki is already in > the > documentation but has not been checked for consistency in the conversion. > > This is not a GSoC task by the program rules but if you have spotted something > that is in both, we would like to resolve it. File a ticket saying wiki page > X and > documentation section Y are the same and that you double checked it. Then > someone with permissions can delete the page. This really is appreciated. I > have done a LOT of pages but there are more to go. > > For example, I think almost all of the patch process and git instructions have > been added to the docs but are still in the Wiki. There may be a section that > remains to be converted but it needs review, missing content added to the > docs, > and then deletion. Deletion involves updating links. Tedious but important. > +1 And if you want to create a FAQ in the User Guide, that would be fine, you can learn how to build the docs and submit patches. As Joel said, that kind of work is not allowed under GSoC but it is good for your knowledge and technical development. > --joel > >> >> >> Ayushman >> ___ >> devel mailing list >> devel@rtems.org >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > ___ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Question regarding an open project and documentation enhancement
On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 9:08 AM Ayushman Mishra wrote: > 1. Hello everyone, I went through open ticket "Code Formatting and > Style Check for RTEMS score" (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) as > a possible GSOC project and discussion thread on it > https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057246.html, > https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057057.html . > But most of the threads on this project are almost a year old , I > wanted to know has there been any recent development on this project > and is there any specific tool developed/under-development for it. I > would be grateful to connect with mentor of this project in-order to > know more about the complexity involved and resources available for > it. > As Sebastian said, it hasn't had any recent work but still needs attention. I think we have a first candidate style description and tool but it has not been checked against the code to see what differences exist between the RTEMS style and the generated style. These differences could be because the formatting specification to the tool needs tweaking, the input RTEMS code didn't follow the rules before, or we could need to consider changing our style rules. The score/src directory is thought to be the one of the ones which would follow the RTEMS style most consistently. Focusing there should help establish a baseline style, scripts, and change recommendations. Style adherence also has to be accounted for as part of the patch review and git commit process. Hopefully it can be automated. Taking a broad view of this could be a good GSoC project. At least I think there is enough programming in it to count as one. > > 2. Also I checked the issue #3958 https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3958 > , fixed some of the broken links of FAQ page but few of the answers I > got were from sites other than user guide. I would like to create a > separate FAQ page in user-guide having some of answers available there > only and some available as links. > As a general rule, a lot of what is in the Wiki should be in regular documentation at docs.rtems.org. A lot has been converted, some in the wiki is already in the documentation but has not been checked for consistency in the conversion. This is not a GSoC task by the program rules but if you have spotted something that is in both, we would like to resolve it. File a ticket saying wiki page X and documentation section Y are the same and that you double checked it. Then someone with permissions can delete the page. This really is appreciated. I have done a LOT of pages but there are more to go. For example, I think almost all of the patch process and git instructions have been added to the docs but are still in the Wiki. There may be a section that remains to be converted but it needs review, missing content added to the docs, and then deletion. Deletion involves updating links. Tedious but important. --joel > > Ayushman > ___ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: Question regarding an open project and documentation enhancement
On 02/03/2021 16:08, Ayushman Mishra wrote: 1. Hello everyone, I went through open ticket "Code Formatting and Style Check for RTEMS score" (https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3860) as a possible GSOC project and discussion thread on it https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057246.html, https://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/2020-February/057057.html . But most of the threads on this project are almost a year old , I wanted to know has there been any recent development on this project and is there any specific tool developed/under-development for it. I would be grateful to connect with mentor of this project in-order to know more about the complexity involved and resources available for it. It stopped working on this since it consumed to much of my time. -- embedded brains GmbH Herr Sebastian HUBER Dornierstr. 4 82178 Puchheim Germany email: sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de phone: +49-89-18 94 741 - 16 fax: +49-89-18 94 741 - 08 Registergericht: Amtsgericht München Registernummer: HRB 157899 Vertretungsberechtigte Geschäftsführer: Peter Rasmussen, Thomas Dörfler Unsere Datenschutzerklärung finden Sie hier: https://embedded-brains.de/datenschutzerklaerung/ ___ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
