-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
Code commit and review process #87
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Hi Peter, On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Peter Brier [email protected]:
Thanks,
|
Currently using the HEAD master branch sometimes breaks a build, due to fixes that are pulled in, that are I would propose that before anything is put in to the master branch, at least:
Does this make sense? |
Hi Peter,
Of course, it makes sense. Cheers, |
Hi Emilio, Sorry to disturb but when this validation process would be available? Does it also mean that any pull request, for example bringing new devices port, would have to take ARMCC into consideration? My concern is really about providing new devices (and boards) with ARM GCC based projects. Cheers |
Hi Aethaniel,
We should have it before the end of the year.
No, it will be configurable, similarly to what we are doing for the build releases: It is totally fine to submit a "pull request" adding support for a new target even if it is initially tested only with GCC. Cheers, |
Hi Everyone (this is probably more useful for Emilio), Have you considered using something like Travis-CI, which could build all of the code when a push is made, and then provide you with a nice graphic that you could include in the README... The only problem might be that it probably doesn't have all of the embedded compilers. If Travis-CI doesn't include the necessary compilers, you could possibly look at something like Buildbot (used by OpenCV), which might allow more flexibility. Thanks, Matthew |
It'd be very easy to setup Travis test with GCC and could even run on Qemu |
Just out of interest, who sent that? It just says mbed notifications... |
I've just got a travis proof of concept working - see 3da2549. The build succeeded on all of the targets that officially support GCC_ARM, however they use Ubuntu, so there's not much we can do about ARM_CC at the moment. |
Just done a test pull request as well, just to make sure that Travis is doing its job properly, and so far it seems to be working well... 👍 |
Indeed, Travis-CI seems really interesting. |
I only had that error on either the first commit, which I had to fix, and when I purposely broke it on a branch to make sure it was working ok |
The most recent commit on the master branch passed. See this: https://travis-ci.org/matthewelse/mbed/builds/13145173 |
I saw. Great job, Matthew. Thanks for sharing this. |
No problem... It could be a bit interesting getting ARM_CC to run though. Maybe wine, or something like that would run it? |
does it have to be installed each time a job is run? I saw the VM is rebuilt every time but maybe I misunderstood this. |
Yeah it has to be all reinstalled. |
wouldn't this be a bit heavy at long term? |
Yes it would, especially if we're having to virtualise windows in order to |
is ARM CC part of DS 5? there is a linux distribution for the community edition. Maybe Emilio could have the answer. |
I think that DS-5 and ARM-CC are separate but I might be wrong... Yeah he probably would, but I have a feeling that the mbed team are over in San Francisco for the week and it'll still be early morning there. |
Actually, I think you might be right. I'm downloading DS5 onto my ubuntu machine now, but it's a massive download (800MB) so it's still not practical in its raw form to be used on a vm that's rebuilt every time. |
The good news is, ARMCC at least works on wine, though it's a bit of an ugly solution especially with a gui installer. I'm still waiting on the DS5 download. |
The question of ARM-CC should be also the same for IAR. |
It would certainly help, but it's by no means as useful as I'm sure Emilio and Bogdan would like it to be... |
(not having ARM-CC, that is) <- As this is used for the online compiler, this is the most important validation step I suppose |
There's also the fact that the build.py script tells you which target builds have passed and which have failed. It'd be nice to somehow use that to our advantage. |
I can compile with armcc without having to install the whole uvision On Monday, October 28, 2013 6:39:30 AM UTC-7, Matthew Else wrote:
|
Looks like github has some issue with comments by email, few usernames including mine show up as mbednotifications instead or is it the way this is setup with the mailing list? |
Yeah I think we'll pretty much have to get ARM to sort this out for licensing reasons, but I'm sure they'll have no problem sorting it out, seeing as they make the compilers... |
The problem is that when you reply to the google group, it goes through the google group to github, so goes down in mbed notifications. |
Hi, Matt,
GCC_ARM should run on all linux distribution, windows and Mac OS. It was tested against ubuntu, redhat. People run it on debian successfully. https://launchpad.net/gcc-arm-embedded/+download Please could you try it and let me know in case it has any problem running on your system. Joey |
Hi all, Yes, ARMCC is cross-platform and there are also releases for Linux. Thank you for your suggestions about Travis. This goes exactly along what we are planning to do. The big picture is that we want to build a bigger farm of mbed devices and we want to provide it as a service through mbed.org for automating these sort of tests: not only the build, but the actual functionalities. We are actually hiring an engineer that will be responsible for this project: Cheers, |
That sounds really interesting, so are you planning to have some sort of automated infrastructure of mbeds that test the builds as they come in? |
… from d0a2597..8689fca 8689fca Reverting address check from transaction find (ARMmbed#89) ca3c3ab Fix transactions to handle all token lengths (ARMmbed#87) git-subtree-dir: features/nanostack/FEATURE_NANOSTACK/coap-service git-subtree-split: 8689fca
… from d0a2597..8689fca 8689fca Reverting address check from transaction find (ARMmbed#89) ca3c3ab Fix transactions to handle all token lengths (ARMmbed#87) git-subtree-dir: features/nanostack/FEATURE_NANOSTACK/coap-service git-subtree-split: 8689fca
0a4f6be astyle validation (ARMmbed#89) f43f52d add mention about mbed-os.lib generation and ignore example folder (ARMmbed#88) 3f48e87 .tmp_data_ptr = 0 added (ARMmbed#55) 9697f63 doc update + mbed-os 5 example application (ARMmbed#84) 891508b CI improvements - introduce Jenkinsfile (ARMmbed#87) git-subtree-dir: features/frameworks/mbed-trace git-subtree-split: 0a4f6be43da09feb2e55eae0697546bcc23d0a23
…8c37..9af7568 9af7568 Merge pull request ARMmbed#87 from ARMmbed/sync_with_mbedos 5c16e57 (via Mbed OS) ns_list: avoid UINT_FAST8_MAX 36b4ace nsdynmenlib API to add memory region to heap (ARMmbed#86) git-subtree-dir: features/frameworks/nanostack-libservice git-subtree-split: 9af756886f082ef8a26372fae5a337203395457f
disable lpticker due to slow access
Would it be a suggestion to implement a "formal" code commit and review process?
e.g. something like this:
https://github.com/energia/Energia/wiki/Bug-fix-and-new-feature-review-process
We could use topic branches, or at least have some staging in the process from feature/bugfix to master branch (e.g. using a "development" branch)
The github wiki pages could be used to document the process (along with coding styles and other considerations)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: