Closed SergioGasquez closed 1 year ago
I'm strongly against this. What would it solve? Save one prompt? If you are anyway doing the two-prompts approach, that you mentioned elsewhere, what's the point?
As for cargo-pio - it is just a readme file.
I think we might be over-rotating on the simplification idea.
As you mentions, it does not save much from user perspective, the main advantage would be cleaning the repository, but if you are strongly against this I am more than happy to close it.
Thank you! I think the cmake code is not really that much in terms of code size or complexity. And more importantly - users do not see the repo code size anyway as you also pointed out. Just the generated project, which is either cargo-first, or cmake, but not both.
Since cargo-first is the recommended approach, what if we remove the cmake version from this template. It would simplify the repo, and/or it can be moved to another repository like
esp-idf-cmake-template
.It is just an idea, I would like to hear any other opinions about this @ivmarkov @MabezDev @JurajSadel @georgik @Vollbrecht @bjoernQ