Added mLRS-Wireless-Bridge for ESP8266

[rotorman]

As ESP8266 cannot do Bluetooth, this edition supports WiFi only.

Tested with ESP-01S, but needs more testing.

[olliw42]

very nice. I like that, and I like you put the esp8266 into an extra file.

(although I wonder if there wouldn't be a neat and clean way to do it)(clean != lots of define dirt in the main ino)

however, please don't rename the esp32 folder&files. Few days ago it all was slim and comprehensible, but now it's getting somewhat out of hands :):) also, remind, each such change induces a chain of actions in the docs ... the docs still don't even reflect the last change fully!!! let's pl stick with mlrs-wireless-bridge for the EPS32 branch :)

[rotorman]

OK, reverted the folder and file name change. It surely would be possible to have only a single *.ino file, but there is IMO no way around having some #ifdefs to differentiate between ESP32 and ESP8266.

[olliw42]

THX.

• could you please rename the esp8266 folder/file to only use - insteasd of _. I.e. mlrs-wireless-bridege-esp8266. Sorry for not having seen before.

• you wouldn't want to leave your name in the top comments? Maybe a line before the "inspired by.." like \ by rotorman or so. (you sure don't have to if you don't want to). EDIT: or maybe instead of the "insired..." line something like "\ adapted from mlrs-wireless-bridge by rotorman"

one point which really concerns me is that it will lack maintenance, since I don't think many will use it and especially not many of the already few who will use it will work on the code to keep it updated ... I am not sure how we should handle that, but I think it needs a scheme since what will be sure, I will not take care of that code. You would have an idea? Only two thoughts crossed my mind (neither necessarily good)

• adding a README to teh -esp8266 folder saying that it may be under maintained and functioning is not garanteed
• add a respective comment in the .ino saying that it may be under maintained and functioning is not garanteed

[rotorman]

Done with the file and folder rename. I do not need the credit line. The commit below adds also a comment about unmaintained code.

Before merging, would be nice to have at least one user provide feedback about success of using this code.

[olliw42]

Before merging, would be nice to have at least one user provide feedback about success of using this code.

would be nice ... but may potentially delay merge to indefinite

[olliw42]

lgtm from my side. MANY THX!

concenring "before merging, would be nice to have at least one user provide feedback", pl drop a note when you want it to get merged :)

[rotorman]

I had a look at how to integrate ESP-01S support into existing mlrs-wireless-bridge and it does not look bad: https://github.com/rotorman/mLRS/commit/7db29ef33b9027735a2d75fa48d04152ed78796f Should we close this here and I re-open a new PR with integrated ESP8266 support?

Note that the rename of SERIAL to SERIALx stems from the issue that ESP8266 compiler does not seem to differentiate between upper and lower case, thus #define SERIAL Serial gave me a build error.

[olliw42]

I was briefly looking at this too, and it indeed doesn't look too bad ... but:

• it would mangle in a less maintained hardware ionto this file, and it would be less possible to make the distinction clear
• while it may blend in well now, it is much less capable hardware and it's not so clear how it would blend in in the future. E.g., if we would add ESP-Now, or have some config storage, and so on. I just note that in other projects whioch support both ESP32 and ESP8266 there tend to be lots of define dirt.

I am hesitant.

I guess we can keep it as it is. It's good to know however how it woudl look like in one file.

that ESP8266 compiler does not seem to differentiate between upper and lower case

I frankly find that hard to believe. I would think that there is probably another issue at work.

[rotorman]

I frankly find that hard to believe. I would think that there is probably another issue at work.

I you have an idea what else it could be, would be interested to learn it.

[olliw42]

it's just that I never have come across a C compiler which would be case insensitive my first guess would be that some library defines it already itself

[olliw42]

many THX !!!