Skip to content

Zephyr Modules: document changes & improvements in the workflow #27185

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Oct 19, 2020
Merged

Zephyr Modules: document changes & improvements in the workflow #27185

merged 8 commits into from
Oct 19, 2020

Conversation

@ioannisg
Copy link
Member

@ioannisg ioannisg commented Jul 27, 2020 •
edited
Loading

I 'd like to open, already, a PR to draft the proposed updates/improvements to the workflow around Zephyr Modules.
Based on the feedback from the Process Forum meetings. Captured in https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1okOQShAr3GZF7VOfRCGa9mw_L7Hyis-oH1kGUpOA66c/edit?userstoinvite=jettrink%40google.com&ts=5f1eef33&actionButton=1#slide=id.p

Keep as draft until the Process Forum has finalized the proposal.

Moving this to non-draft, since the discussions are concluded, and the Forum's feedback is reflected here.
Comments are still welcome.
The proposal requires TSC approval.
@ioannisg ioannisg requested a review from nashif July 27, 2020 15:39
@ioannisg ioannisg changed the title Doc modules draft Zephyr Modules: document changes & improvements in the workflow Jul 27, 2020
mniestroj
mniestroj reviewed Jul 27, 2020
View reviewed changes
jukkar
jukkar reviewed Jul 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
@ioannisg ioannisg force-pushed the doc_modules_draft branch from 917ce86 to 8f0a549 Compare July 28, 2020 10:35
@ioannisg ioannisg added In progress For PRs: is work in progress and should not be merged yet. For issues: Is being worked on area: Process labels Jul 28, 2020
@ioannisg ioannisg added this to the v2.4.0 milestone Jul 28, 2020
@ioannisg ioannisg self-assigned this Jul 28, 2020
@ioannisg ioannisg force-pushed the doc_modules_draft branch 5 times, most recently from e2c21eb to fccc0a4 Compare July 28, 2020 21:24
jukkar
jukkar reviewed Jul 29, 2020
View reviewed changes
@ioannisg ioannisg force-pushed the doc_modules_draft branch 2 times, most recently from 64c00d1 to f3650cb Compare July 29, 2020 13:19
@ioannisg ioannisg requested a review from carlescufi July 29, 2020 13:49
@ioannisg ioannisg added the TSC Topics that need TSC discussion label Jul 29, 2020
@ioannisg ioannisg force-pushed the doc_modules_draft branch 3 times, most recently from 639ffa1 to 2dff91b Compare July 29, 2020 14:55
@aescolar
Copy link
Member

aescolar commented Aug 26, 2020

@aescolar @tejlmand @nvlsianpu @henrikbrixandersen appreciate your feedback. This issue was discussed in the last Forum session. The decision is not to deal with this use-case at all, in the current proposal. The reason is that essentially, this policy is to be applied to non-module external projects. Normally, modules will require downstream commits and need to include a module.yml file in the code base; I've added this in the module definition which is re-worded in this PR.

That said, https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/edtt/ will currently not classify asa Zephyr module, but rather as an external project, so for now, this proposal does not restrict the update policies in this particular repository. We will deal with this in the future.

Thanks @ioannisg. Indeed my immediate concern are the EDTT and the nrf_hw_models as those are the ones I maintain.
And although my request for allowing direct replicas is general, I would personally have less trouble with this new procedure, if those 2 modules are considered excluded for whatever reason.
Anyhow:
The EDTT is indeed just a "west module", but not compiled with Zephyr
The nrf_hw models is both a "west module" and a "zephyr module" (meaning it is compiled in). But it is only used for CI/workstation testing, so that code does not end up in real targets.
erwango
erwango reviewed Aug 26, 2020
View reviewed changes
erwango
erwango reviewed Aug 26, 2020
View reviewed changes
@jukkar jukkar removed their request for review August 26, 2020 14:35
carlescufi
carlescufi requested changes Aug 28, 2020
View reviewed changes
erwango
erwango reviewed Sep 7, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@erwango erwango left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There is nothing about policy around module specific CI (github actions for instance).
Is that allowed ? Any specific policy around these ?
I think this should be clarified, at least the existing status.
@ioannisg ioannisg requested a review from carlescufi September 18, 2020 15:02
@MaureenHelm MaureenHelm modified the milestones: v2.4.0, v2.5.0 Sep 27, 2020
@ioannisg
doc: modules: Introductory text about module candidates
dfc4726 
Capture the discussion regarding which external projects should be considered as candidates for zephyr modules. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
doc: modules: define the individual roles for zephyr modules
b20bada 
Submit a paragraph that summarizes the different individual roles in Zephyr module repositories. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
doc: modules: add text about contribution workflow
60945f4 
Add a section that summarizes the recommended contribution workflow in zephyr modules. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
doc: modules: initial text about licensing policies in modules
a21d341 
Adding content to describe policies and requirements around licensing in Zephyr modules. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
doc: modules: document Testing and Documentation and module removal
9d24e00 
In the module documentation page, add sections for Testing and Documentation requirements. Add also a section decribing polices for module deprecation and removal. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
doc: modules: document synchronization practices in module repos
151d620 
In the module documentation page, add a section to describe the requirements and the allowed practices for synchronizing the module code base with the upstream project. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
doc: modules: move building with modules into own child section
c214bf8 
We move the section about how to build Zephyr and integrate with modules into its own section with title 'Integrate modules in Zephyr build system'. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
doc: modules: rework content describing submitting changes to modules
6ef9a31 
We rework the titles and headers of the section where we describe the process for submitting new module and changes to existing modules. Move the 'requirements' section at the top of the page. Signed-off-by: Ioannis Glaropoulos <Ioannis.Glaropoulos@nordicsemi.no>
@ioannisg
Copy link
Member Author

ioannisg commented Sep 28, 2020

@carlescufi please, revisit your review, so we can get this PR merged :)
@tejlmand tejlmand mentioned this pull request Oct 2, 2020
Closed
carlescufi
carlescufi approved these changes Oct 19, 2020
View reviewed changes
doc/guides/modules.rst Outdated
Copy link
Member

@carlescufi carlescufi Oct 19, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

OK, fair enough
@carlescufi carlescufi merged commit 4932925 into zephyrproject-rtos:master Oct 19, 2020
@tejlmand tejlmand mentioned this pull request Oct 22, 2020
Closed
@tejlmand tejlmand mentioned this pull request Jan 11, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

area: Documentation area: Process TSC Topics that need TSC discussion