Skip to content
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

Pull request for Release_1.1 #424

Open
SiyuanCheng-CN opened this issue Jul 5, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Pull request for Release_1.1 #424

SiyuanCheng-CN opened this issue Jul 5, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@SiyuanCheng-CN
Copy link

Hello,

I'm working on porting embARC MLI Release_1.1 to Zephyr RTOS as an external module and want to create a PR. Given the module porting guideline, it is said: "The module repository codebase shall include a module.yml file in a zephyr/ folder at the root of the repository"(https://docs.zephyrproject.org/latest/guides/modules.html#modules).

The module.yml file is very simple and won't break the source file in MLI:

diff --git a/zephyr/module.yml b/zephyr/module.yml
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b84b5e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/zephyr/module.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+name: embarc_mli
+build:
+  cmake-ext: True
+  kconfig-ext: True

Now I can't create a PR because Release_1.1 is a tag, not a branch. And I don't have permission to push my branch. What's the best way to proceed with that to port embARC MLI in Zephyr RTOS?

Best,
Siyuan

@JaccovG
Copy link
Contributor

JaccovG commented Jul 6, 2021

Hi Siyuan,
What you could do is create a fork and push your change to that forked repository.
Regards,
Jacco

@abrodkin
Copy link
Member

abrodkin commented Jul 7, 2021

@JaccovG our idea was to make embARC MLI usable as it is with Zephyr, i.e. so that we may have a couple of examples in Zephyr which use embARC MLI and all that be buildable in the same one flow.
For that to happen we need to "add" embARC MLI as an external module (think of git submodule) in Zephyr's build systems and exactly for that we need to have this zephyr/module.yml integrated in the embARC MLI.

That said it would be good to get that proposed change integrated in our embARC tree rather than be in some another stale fork of embARC MLI.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants