Re: Single Committer

+1 the old way of working was ok but this will put pressure on Greg again. We should define the workflow as soon as possible and work as we are intended to. On Tue, Dec 24, 2019, 09:48 Abdelatif Guettouche < abdelatif.guettou...@gmail.com> wrote: > This makes sense giving the circumstances. It wi

Re: Single Committer

This makes sense giving the circumstances. It will get us going. We can still help reviewing PRs. On Tue, Dec 24, 2019, 08:03 Disruptive Solutions < disruptivesolution...@gmail.com> wrote: > A platform like this could help? Samsung seems to use it? Does Apache has > something like this “Helix Cor

Why the text displayed by SSD1306 / I2C is reversed along the vertical axis

Hi~ I am trying the graphics module of nuttx. I just used the nxtext sample program and found that the text displayed on oled is reversed. It seems that each character is flipped vertically. Does anyone know what is going on here? how should I solve this? Thank you! BOARD:STM32F407VE（compatible

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] huahang opened a new pull request #3: Implement SO_ERROR for getsockopt()

huahang opened a new pull request #3: Implement SO_ERROR for getsockopt() URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/3 This change implements SO_ERROR for getsockopt() Signed-off-by: liuhuahang This is an auto

Re: Single Committer

A platform like this could help? Samsung seems to use it? Does Apache has something like this “Helix Core” and “Swarm” ?? https://www.perforce.com/products/helix-swarm Benefit drom these ideas? And you could start with 1 commiter and scale up later. The way of working will be getting more clear

Re: Single Committer

+1 Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone > Op 24 dec. 2019 om 06:07 heeft Nathan Hartman het > volgende geschreven: > > On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 7:51 PM Gregory Nutt wrote: >> >> Recent events have made me reconsider some decisions I made. I threw >> off the single committer mantle when I saw the abu

Re: Single Committer

On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 7:51 PM Gregory Nutt wrote: > > Recent events have made me reconsider some decisions I made. I threw > off the single committer mantle when I saw the abuse of privilege in the > repositories. If the PPMC agrees to it, I will take up that role again. > > But let's be frank

Re: Single Committer

bq. I would create a dev branch and expect all PRs to be against that dev branch. An alternative way could be make master/trunk branch a dev branch and allow all PRs to checked in, at the same time, maintain a stable branch which you can cut release (as release manager) and pick up PRs that you car

Re: Single Committer

I definitely support this approach: keep the original workflow before the new workflow setup. We have enough time to achieve "THE APACHE WAY" step by step before NuttX graduate to the top level project. On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 8:51 AM Gregory Nutt wrote: > > Recent events have made me reconsider

Re: [PATCH] doubt about fwrite

Thanks for gregory and xiang. yes... the right way is modified the error handling code in nsh_catfile not fwrite. I will repaired it again. BR, wei peng Xiang Xiao 于2019年12月24日周二 上午9:58写道： > Hi Peng, > From http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/cstdio/fwrite/ > fwrite return zero to indicate the e

Re: [PATCH] doubt about fwrite

Hi Peng, >From http://www.cplusplus.com/reference/cstdio/fwrite/ fwrite return zero to indicate the error, the detailed info could get from errno. So the right change is modified the error handling code in nsh_catfile, not the return type of fwrite. Thanks Xiang On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 9:48 AM we

Re: [PATCH] doubt about fwrite

see the size_t is unsigned cannot be negative. that is the problem. i think if the terminal is close,the "size_t fwrite()"function should return a negative number,and the nsh_catfile should be broken. That is not the way that fwrite returns errors.  If an error occurs fwrite returns fewer ite

Re: [PATCH] doubt about fwrite

hi David, Thanks for your reply. Yes...i know the interface interface is standard,so what i had changed in codes just repaired the problem.perhaps i should describe the problem in detail. I entering "dmesg" on both terminals，because of the “CONFIG_IOB_DEBUG” is enable so both of terminals will

Re: Single Committer

+1. I think it is reasonable to just keep the original workflow as is for now, as we still need to make progress on the project. I do not think the ASF will 'hate' this, you can not graduate if you keep doing things like this, that's all, fair enough. And on the workflow part, I suggest you start

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo merged pull request #1: imxrt fixes

patacongo merged pull request #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL

Single Committer

Recent events have made me reconsider some decisions I made.  I threw off the single committer mantle when I saw the abuse of privilege in the repositories.  If the PPMC agrees to it, I will take up that role again. But let's be frank.  Here is what I think that means: * I would be sole commi

Re: Ethernet over USB on Arduino Due

I don't think that the SAM3X8E supports the UDP module.  Looks like it supports UDPHS which would be different: https://www.microchip.com/wwwproducts/en/ATsam3x8e#additional-features See also arch/arm/include/sam34/chip.h. There is a hardware/sam_udphs.h header file, but I don't see any udphs

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568604222 I would like to close this now. I do not think it should be incorporated into the NuttX repositories now. It deals with specific logic for the

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568604222 I would like to close this now. I do not think it should be incorporated into the NuttX repositories now. It deals with specific logic for the

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568604222 I would like to close this now. I do not think it should be incorporated into the NuttX repositories now. It deals with specific logic for the

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568604222 I would like to close this now. I do not think it should be incorporated into the NuttX repositories now. It deals with specific logic for the NuttX

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo closed pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo closed pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHu

Re: Power Management on the L432KC

Thank you I will look into it! Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone > Op 24 dec. 2019 om 00:05 heeft Gregory Nutt het > volgende geschreven: > >  >>> I want to use the STANDBY mode in Power Management in the Nucleo-L432KC. >>> Now I am reading that in the STM32 Power Management is implemented. >>> >>

Re: Power Management on the L432KC

I want to use the STANDBY mode in Power Management in the Nucleo-L432KC. Now I am reading that in the STM32 Power Management is implemented. What is the best way to get this working for the L432KC? I see that in arch there are some power routines implemented. The standby register settings "l

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568540319 I don't think Xaio Xiang's proposal and your implementation are mutually exclusive. Correct me if I am misreading things, but I believe t

Re: Power Management on the L432KC

I want to use the STANDBY mode in Power Management in the Nucleo-L432KC. Now I am reading that in the STM32 Power Management is implemented. What is the best way to get this working for the L432KC? I see that in arch there are some power routines implemented. The standby register settings "loo

Power Management on the L432KC

A content question (I think this is possible?) . I want to use the STANDBY mode in Power Management in the Nucleo-L432KC. Now I am reading that in the STM32 Power Management is implemented. What is the best way to get this working for the L432KC? I see that in arch there are some power routin

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

Did you look at https://www.atlassian.com/nl/software/crucible ?? And: https://www.perforce.com/solutions/static-analysis https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/comparing-workflows The concept "The Centralized Workflow" was the "old" workflow, but now maybe the concept "Feature branching" is

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568540319 I don't think Xaio Xiang's proposal and your implementation are mutually exclusive. Correct me if I am misreading things, but I believe t

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568540319 I don't think Xaio Xiang's proposal and your implementation are mutually exclusive. Correct me if I am misreading things, but I believe t

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] mubes commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes

mubes commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568575636 Yeah, lets move this onto another PR so we can fix up whatever needs to be done to solidify the filesystem structure for the rt's. Certainly I think moving the GPIOs, IOMU

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] btashton commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes

btashton commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568574794 @mubes No complaints on my end (beyond the tedious task of transcribing datasheets to code). This family has been handled so much better by NXP than ST did with the ST

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] mubes commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes

mubes commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568570219 Way back when DavidS and I talked about this at length and then there was a lot of work done in imxrt to split it into the different chips - 1050, 60 and 20 to form the va

Re: Ethernet over USB on Arduino Due

..., but I'm down to this last missing function: void up_usbinitialize(void) Defined here: $ grep -r up_usbinitialize arch/arm/src/sam34 arch/arm/src/sam34/sam_udp.c: * Name: up_usbinitialize arch/arm/src/sam34/sam_udp.c:void up_usbinitialize(void) arch/arm/src/sam34/sam_udp.c:   * in when up_

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

Hi, > Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I > know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but > that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this > list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page. Non committers

Ethernet over USB on Arduino Due

Hi, Does anyone know if it's possible to do Ethernet over USB on NuttX on the Arduino Due? For instance, like Alan Carvalho de Assis discusses in this Youtube video ? I can get a minimal NuttX installation working without TCP/IP and UDP/IP networking.

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568540319 I don't think Xaio Xiang's proposal and your implementation are mutually exclusive. T

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568537855 Sorry about the Open/Close/Open/Close. Not exactly sure what I am doing. I suspect that it is the "Close and Comment" button next to the "Comm

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568537855 Sorry about the Open/Close/Open/Close. Not exactly sure what I am doing. I suspect that it is the "Close and Comment" button next to the "Comm

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 opened a new pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 opened a new pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2 @patacongo - This will get us off the ground on the formatting tool we can get in to the workfow. We are going to need your expertise on the the makefile

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568537855 Sorry about the Open/Close/Open/Close. Not exactly sure what I am doing. I suspect that it is the "Close and Comment" button next to the "Comm

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568538442 LOL - RTM, If we had CI you would have swapped it. *From:* patacongo [mailto:notificati...@github.com] *Sent:* Monday, December 23, 201

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568537855 Sorry about the Open/Close/Open/Close. Not exactly sure what I am doing. I suspect that it is the "Close and Comment" button next to the "Comm

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568538098 Is it that you both are too close to the solution space that you cannot see this from a N00B perspective? Do you have tab completion on

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568537855 Sorry about the Open/Close/Open/Close. Not exactly sure what I am doing. I suspect that it is the "Close and Comment" button next to the "Comment" bu

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

+1 keep it simple Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPhone > Op 23 dec. 2019 om 17:06 heeft Sebastien Lorquet het > volgende geschreven: > > OK. > > That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these > discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads >

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo closed pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo closed pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2 This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHu

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo edited a comment on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568537008 > But it's very helpful to issue the above command in the script, because many user even expert don't know this trick. There are also cas

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568537008 > But it's very helpful to issue the above command in the script, because many user even expert don't know this trick. There are also lots of ca

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

Brennan created a page in the Confluence for the workflow document. I know that only committers can edit the Confluence wiki directly but that is not a problem: Anyone can write some text and email it to this list, and a committer can edit it into the Confluence page. (Hint: People who particip

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] xiaoxiang781216 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

xiaoxiang781216 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568532088 > > Yes, but we already have the rule in tools/Makefile.host for generating nxstyle binary, the question is where should we trigger the target. I

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 11:06 AM Sebastien Lorquet wrote: > > OK. > > That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these > discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads > full > of heated opinions in 2-3 days is insane. > > I just cant dedicat

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568528569 This will build all of the tools including a dozen or so that you don't need and probably will never need: $(MAKE) -C tools -f Makefile.host

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568527990 Because most of them are not needed for the build. And it just wastes build cycles building tools that are not used. You ran into this with nxstyle.e

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

I think the process should be as simple as possible, and improved later. Just select the absolute bare minimum that could start to work and discard everything else so this project can work again. Depends on what you mean by simple.  Using some less-than-simple tools can make the workflow ver

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568525036 >Yes, but we already have the rule in tools/Makefile.host for generating nxstyle binary, the question is where should we trigger the target. It's better

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

Agreed.. It is painful and awkward and I am not so optimistic at the moment.  We will have to give it more time and see if people and learn to cooperate in groups or not. Also, I did not see a notification that the BB repositories had been frozen. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/nuttx/

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal - not so simple?

OK. That is too much email for me, I just cant follow and understand all these discussions anymore. Almost 300 messages among multiple overlapping threads full of heated opinions in 2-3 days is insane. I just cant dedicate enough time reading any more of this. I have other things to do than tryin

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] xiaoxiang781216 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

xiaoxiang781216 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568512309 > > @btashton @davids5 What I mean here is that we don't need modify Makefile, is engouh to add a script invoke nxstyle(maybe build it too) to ch

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568502128 >@davids5 I would prefer we work on check_code_style.sh first, and forget Makefile.unix at all. Why? this avoid we couple the script logic with Ma

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360917765 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .con

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360917765 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .con

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360905760 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .con

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360905760 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .con

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360905760 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .con

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] xiaoxiang781216 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

xiaoxiang781216 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360904297 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "N

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] xiaoxiang781216 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

xiaoxiang781216 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360904297 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "N

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal

Two questions: 1 Who will apply the patches? 2 Can we use and merge a PR that has been reviewed? You are basically asking for the workflow requirements.

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360898824 ## File path: README.txt ## @@ -1368,6 +1368,15 @@ Build Targets and Options Removes derived object files, arc

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360889472 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .config

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360887522 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .config

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360887345 ## File path: tools/check_code_style.sh ## @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env bash + +if [ -z "$1" ]; then + FI

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360887055 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -324,6 +324,14 @@ tools/cnvwindeps$(HOSTEXEEXT): # $(Q) echo "No .con

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal

Let's not start new questions for now? Be patient and let's see what other people think. One of the most important rule in ASF is 'community over code', so although I also think accepting patches is the most emergency thing here, but let's see other people's opinion first. Thanks. David Sidrane

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360886535 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -697,3 +704,8 @@ apps_distclean: ifneq ($(APPDIR),) $(Q) $(MAKE) -C "

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360886392 ## File path: tools/check_code_style.sh ## @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env bash + +if [ -z "$1" ]; then + FILES

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360886136 ## File path: tools/check_code_style.sh ## @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +#!/usr/bin/env bash + +if [ -z "$1" ]; then + FILES

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 edited a comment on issue #1: imxrt fixes

davids5 edited a comment on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568473865 @btashton > @davids5 This touches some of the same IO stuff that I have been working on on the imxrt platform, some of the changes are style. Did you make

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes

davids5 commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568473865 @btashton > @davids5 This touches some of the same IO stuff that I have been working on on the imxrt platform, some of the changes are style. Did you make these

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes

davids5 commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568469970 > Thank you for your work, @davids5! > > > We should warn all the NXP IMXRT and I think NXP S32K users the code will hang the OS. > > A lot of the periphera

RE: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal

Hi Duo, Well said and I am all for it. Two questions: 1 Who will apply the patches? 2 Can we use and merge a PR that has been reviewed? David -Original Message- From: 张铎(Duo Zhang) [mailto:palomino...@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2019 4:35 AM To: dev@nuttx.apache.org Subject:

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal

For our Chinese people we do not think starting working when the requirements are not very clear is a big risk, this is what happens every day here. You can not plan everything so just have a try, if it does not work then just drop it and retry, no harm :) And in my experience, if we can not agree

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] jarivanewijk edited a comment on issue #1: imxrt fixes

jarivanewijk edited a comment on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568463453 Thank you for your work, @davids5! > We should warn all the NXP IMXRT and I think NXP S32K users the code will hang the OS. A lot of the periph

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] jarivanewijk edited a comment on issue #1: imxrt fixes

jarivanewijk edited a comment on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568463453 Thank you for your work, @davids5! > We should warn all the NXP IMXRT and I think NXP S32K users the code will hang the OS. A lot of the periph

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] jarivanewijk commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes

jarivanewijk commented on issue #1: imxrt fixes URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/1#issuecomment-568463453 Thank you for your work, @davids5! > We should warn all the NXP IMXRT and I think NXP S32K users the code will hang the OS. A lot of the peripheral co

Re: Signal to Noise (was RE: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal)

Hi, > I was thinking about calling a vote on limiting the # of emails. IMO A vote will not help, it will make things worse, perhaps try discuss but most of all just try to be a little more considerate for people who are subscribers to this list. No hard rules just guidelines and consideration o

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360868178 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -697,3 +704,8 @@ apps_distclean: ifneq ($(APPDIR),) $(Q) $(MAKE) -

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

patacongo commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360730399 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -697,3 +704,8 @@ apps_distclean: ifneq ($(APPDIR),) $(Q) $(MAKE) -

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on a change in pull request #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#discussion_r360866861 ## File path: tools/Makefile.unix ## @@ -697,3 +704,8 @@ apps_distclean: ifneq ($(APPDIR),) $(Q) $(MAKE) -C "

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568456453 > @btashton @davids5 What I mean here is that we don't need modify Makefile, is engouh to add a script invoke nxstyle(maybe build it too) to check the st

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568446656 Oh I should also mention that the this was from before I added the class of error and treated long lines as warnings in H files. ``` exec < /de

[GitHub] [incubator-nuttx] davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments

davids5 commented on issue #2: Master pr nxstyle improvments URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/2#issuecomment-568445894 > Maybe we can use git pre-commit hook to ensure anyone run nxsytle before commit to his/her local working branch: > https://eing.github.io/technology

Re: Community

It is too early to be digging holes.  Let's agree where the whole should be dug before we start digging.  Then there will be no one looking over your shoulder.Sent from Samsung tablet. Original message From: David Sidrane Date: 12/23/19 4:10 AM (GMT-06:00) To: dev@nuttx.apach

Re: Community

On 2019/12/22 19:29:38, Gregory Nutt wrote: > > > Don't feel bad if there is haggling. Any document, no matter who writes it > > or how well, will need more work to fill in missing pieces, edit, etc., to > > bring it to "shipping quality." I will try to help as much as I can in the > > coming

Re: [PATCH] doubt about fwrite

Hi wei peng See below. On 2019/12/23 07:41:40, wei peng wrote: > hi~ > I connected the target board to terminal via "telnet" , in some cases > the terminal will be frozen. Here are detailed steps: > >1. Enable "CONFIG_IOB_DEBUG"[necessary]. >2. New two terminals and connect to targe

Signal to Noise (was RE: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal)

Hi, >-Original Message- >From: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com] >Sent: Monday, December 23, 2019 1:09 AM >To: dev@nuttx.apache.org >Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal >Hi, >> I would also suggest you try to slow down the conversation here and think >> a little

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal

Hi, > I would also suggest you try to slow down the conversation here and think a > little more about what you write, that way you get higher quality responses. It’s also allows more timid people and those who are not full time on this to speak up and get noticed. Some ASF people make a self im

RE: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal

Well Said! -Original Message- From: Justin Mclean [mailto:jus...@classsoftware.com] Sent: Monday, December 23, 2019 1:02 AM To: dev@nuttx.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal Hi, Apache has a concept of small reversible steps, if something can move the project forwa

Re: [DISCUSS] Simple Workflow Proposal

Hi, Apache has a concept of small reversible steps, if something can move the project forward, try it out, it it doesn’t work or you find a problem need just make another small step in the right direction. Many many Apache projects use CTR (commit and review later) and have simple workflows an

Re: Simple Workflow Proposal

@David - sorry! you are right! On Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 10:46 David Sidrane wrote: > +1 100% agreement > > WOW - The Evolve Way of Working (WoW) process (Disciplined Agile (DA)) > > Please, Please do not assume TLA[1] are known. > > We do not all spec the same language here. > > > -Original Me

  1   2   >