search

rust-embedded / not-yet-awesome-embedded-rust

A collection of items that are not yet awesome in Embedded Rust
Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International
117 stars 11 forks source link

Update README.md #6

Closed flip111 closed 2 months ago

flip111 commented 5 years ago

This adds two new items on the list

jamesmunns commented 5 years ago

Hey @flip111, a couple things:

I've added one "real" example to the readme, discussing sharing data with interrupts. Maybe this would give a better idea of what I had in mind for the template?

Also, it is okay if "Work in Progress" is not applicable, as I think most problems won't have any to start with. It's okay to leave that field as "None yet!", or something similar.

Initially I disabled issues for this repo, to prevent confusion of people adding items there instead of to the list. I have re-enabled them, as it might be useful to discuss "meta" issues, like the template. In general - would be open to PRs that change/improve the template (even making it more of a template, rather than an example, like you suggested).

Regarding discussing implementation: I think that a github readme is not a great place to describe or discuss implementation, because it's hard to comment in-line. I'd prefer for this repo not become a place where people discuss implementation of specific problems, even in the issue tracker. I am open to suggestions here.

As a reminder, this is a project that the @rust-embedded/resources team is taking on, almost entirely out of our own free time. Any assistance to keep the discussion productive rather than combative is very appreciated, and in general, it is always more productive to suggest improvements yourself (as a PR, etc.), rather than requesting or demanding anyone to make a change out of their own free time. We are always happy to review and comment on PRs, changes, and improvements; but we may not have time to discuss, research, or iterate in depth.

flip111 commented 5 years ago

Thanks for the update on the template.

You raise a good point about the readme getting too big. Since your open to suggestions I would suggest to make a folder and put all bigger texts in there as markdown files and then link to it from the readme.

I'm not too happy that you said I don't like your section "implementation" I want "requirements" instead. I don't like to "require", instead I want to suggest a path forward to making it happen. This is the essence of what I was trying to convey there. The item would be a non-trivial piece of software with already some prior work which would benefit greatly from integration with other parts of the ecosystem in the long run (especially svd2rust). As this repository is a means to an end I ought it to be more important to discuss the content rather than the form. I think it's fair for me to ask you "what to do now with these points?" when you request a section to be replaced. I already felt dismissed, now I attempted to reach some compromise on which I get to keep the content and you get to keep a template. I'm willing to improve the text as long as it takes to fit a template as long as the template is suitable to fit the goal of the repository. Sorry but "I prefer requirements instead" is not actionable for me. We can be productive when comments can go both ways. I'm sorry to hear this review is taking too much of your free time. Maybe we can wait for another reviewer to come along to go more in depth/iterate or alternatively just close the PR? You know I'm also making this in my free time for "the benefit of human kind". I'm sure if the content is interesting enough someone else will come along and pick it up. If not it seems I was wrong in the first place with the thought that this idea was worth sharing.

On Sat, Mar 9, 2019, 11:44 James Munns notifications@github.com wrote:

Hey @flip111 https://github.com/flip111, a couple things:

I've added one "real" example to the readme, discussing sharing data with interrupts. Maybe this would give a better idea of what I had in mind for the template?

Also, it is okay if "Work in Progress" is not applicable, as I think most problems won't have any to start with. It's okay to leave that field as "None yet!", or something similar.

Initially I disabled issues for this repo, to prevent confusion of people adding items there instead of to the list. I have re-enabled them, as it might be useful to discuss "meta" issues, like the template. In general - would be open to PRs that change/improve the template (even making it more of a template, rather than an example, like you suggested).

Regarding discussing implementation: I think that a github readme is not a great place to describe or discuss implementation, because it's hard to comment in-line. I'd prefer for this repo not become a place where people discuss implementation of specific problems, even in the issue tracker. I am open to suggestions here.

As a reminder, this is a project that the @rust-embedded/resources https://github.com/orgs/rust-embedded/teams/resources team is taking on, almost entirely out of our own free time. Any assistance to keep the discussion productive rather than combative is very appreciated, and in general, it is always more productive to suggest improvements yourself (as a PR, etc.), rather than requesting or demanding anyone to make a change out of their own free time. We are always happy to review and comment on PRs, changes, and improvements; but we may not have time to discuss, research, or iterate in depth.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rust-embedded/not-yet-awesome-embedded-rust/pull/6#issuecomment-471170129, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACI_gHIsgb4LFJo32gF7uPv_uEFo-zYbks5vU56ngaJpZM4bh9ld .

therealprof commented 5 years ago

Hi @flip111,

I find it great that you already have some thoughts about a possible implementation. Also it seems we're in agreement that this document is not a good place to store, discuss and update specifics. So my idea here would be to extend the template to allow for pointers to any collaboration places (GitHub, HackMD, dropbox paper, Discord, IRC, ...) where people can draft ideas, gather their thoughts, exchange information and coordinate implementations.

How does that sound?

flip111 commented 5 years ago

Sounds good :) I'll work on it later

On Sat, Mar 9, 2019, 14:05 Daniel Egger notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi @flip111 https://github.com/flip111,

I find it great that you already have some thoughts about a possible implementation. Also it seems we're in agreement that this document is not a good place to store, discuss and update specifics. So my idea here would be to extend the template to allow for pointers to any collaboration places (GitHub, HackMD, dropbox paper, Discord, IRC, ...) where people can draft ideas, gather their thoughts, exchange information and coordinate implementations.

How does that sound?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/rust-embedded/not-yet-awesome-embedded-rust/pull/6#issuecomment-471180384, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACI_gDDb3hxnPZNqsMjcPPgHBdLrVOIOks5vU7--gaJpZM4bh9ld .

flip111 commented 2 months ago

Closing because embedded programming has lost my interest.