You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@mynewt.apache.org by Andrzej Kaczmarek <an...@codecoup.pl> on 2018/08/22 14:12:17 UTC
[RFC] BSP rename for Nordic dev kit
Hi all,
Since nRF52840 DK is available for quite some time now, I was going to
rename "nrf52840pdk" to "nrf52840dk" so it matches current version.
However, it is a good moment to change naming scheme for all dev kits
from Nordic and use board name (e.g. PCA10056) instead of dev kit name
(e.g. nRF52840 DK). There are at least two good reasons for this:
1. avoid possible renames in future once new revision of dev kit is
launched (PDK -> DK) since this is the same board, just with a
different revision
2. make selection of proper BSP easier since each board has its name
clearly visible on a sticker (note that BSP description states both
names)
I created a PR which does such rename:
https://github.com/apache/mynewt-core/pull/1348
Thoughs? Are there any good reasons why we should not rename it?
(except for historical reasons :P)
Best,
Andrzej
Re: [RFC] BSP rename for Nordic dev kit
Posted by Jacob Rosenthal <ja...@gmail.com>.
I think that all sounds good, assuming the 'old' names use compat mcus and
the 'new' names use the new mcus
On Fri, Aug 24, 2018 at 8:07 AM Andrzej Kaczmarek <
andrzej.kaczmarek@codecoup.pl> wrote:
> Hi Jacob,
>
> I would also like to keep old names at least for upcoming release, but
> my main concern here is that at the moment the only way to do this is
> to have duplicated code which I don't really like. We had this already
> for BLE sample apps and it created a lot of confusion.
> However, I am trying to extend newt so it will be possible to create
> dummy package which only links to other package (simple dependency
> won't work here) and thus we can keep old names linked to new names.
> This could be useful in general so we can move packages and let newt
> emit a clear warning that package name has changed and settings should
> be updated. I hope I can push some working PR soon for testing...
>
> Best,
> Andrzej
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:22 PM Jacob Rosenthal <ja...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Sounds good to me. Though Id say it might make sense to keep old names
> > around with the compat mcu for a release or something? With some
> > deprecation message and no updates for that cycle, and have the new names
> > with the new mcu
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 7:50 AM Miguel Azevedo <mi...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I agree that we should use the board name instead of the kit name, if
> dk is
> > > the same board as pdk.
> > >
> > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, 15:12 Andrzej Kaczmarek, <
> > > andrzej.kaczmarek@codecoup.pl>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Since nRF52840 DK is available for quite some time now, I was going
> to
> > > > rename "nrf52840pdk" to "nrf52840dk" so it matches current version.
> > > > However, it is a good moment to change naming scheme for all dev kits
> > > > from Nordic and use board name (e.g. PCA10056) instead of dev kit
> name
> > > > (e.g. nRF52840 DK). There are at least two good reasons for this:
> > > >
> > > > 1. avoid possible renames in future once new revision of dev kit is
> > > > launched (PDK -> DK) since this is the same board, just with a
> > > > different revision
> > > > 2. make selection of proper BSP easier since each board has its name
> > > > clearly visible on a sticker (note that BSP description states both
> > > > names)
> > > >
> > > > I created a PR which does such rename:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/mynewt-core/pull/1348
> > > >
> > > > Thoughs? Are there any good reasons why we should not rename it?
> > > > (except for historical reasons :P)
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > Andrzej
> > > >
> > >
>
Re: [RFC] BSP rename for Nordic dev kit
Posted by Andrzej Kaczmarek <an...@codecoup.pl>.
Hi Jacob,
I would also like to keep old names at least for upcoming release, but
my main concern here is that at the moment the only way to do this is
to have duplicated code which I don't really like. We had this already
for BLE sample apps and it created a lot of confusion.
However, I am trying to extend newt so it will be possible to create
dummy package which only links to other package (simple dependency
won't work here) and thus we can keep old names linked to new names.
This could be useful in general so we can move packages and let newt
emit a clear warning that package name has changed and settings should
be updated. I hope I can push some working PR soon for testing...
Best,
Andrzej
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:22 PM Jacob Rosenthal <ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Sounds good to me. Though Id say it might make sense to keep old names
> around with the compat mcu for a release or something? With some
> deprecation message and no updates for that cycle, and have the new names
> with the new mcu
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 7:50 AM Miguel Azevedo <mi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree that we should use the board name instead of the kit name, if dk is
> > the same board as pdk.
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, 15:12 Andrzej Kaczmarek, <
> > andrzej.kaczmarek@codecoup.pl>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Since nRF52840 DK is available for quite some time now, I was going to
> > > rename "nrf52840pdk" to "nrf52840dk" so it matches current version.
> > > However, it is a good moment to change naming scheme for all dev kits
> > > from Nordic and use board name (e.g. PCA10056) instead of dev kit name
> > > (e.g. nRF52840 DK). There are at least two good reasons for this:
> > >
> > > 1. avoid possible renames in future once new revision of dev kit is
> > > launched (PDK -> DK) since this is the same board, just with a
> > > different revision
> > > 2. make selection of proper BSP easier since each board has its name
> > > clearly visible on a sticker (note that BSP description states both
> > > names)
> > >
> > > I created a PR which does such rename:
> > > https://github.com/apache/mynewt-core/pull/1348
> > >
> > > Thoughs? Are there any good reasons why we should not rename it?
> > > (except for historical reasons :P)
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Andrzej
> > >
> >
Re: [RFC] BSP rename for Nordic dev kit
Posted by Jacob Rosenthal <ja...@gmail.com>.
Sounds good to me. Though Id say it might make sense to keep old names
around with the compat mcu for a release or something? With some
deprecation message and no updates for that cycle, and have the new names
with the new mcu
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 7:50 AM Miguel Azevedo <mi...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I agree that we should use the board name instead of the kit name, if dk is
> the same board as pdk.
>
> On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, 15:12 Andrzej Kaczmarek, <
> andrzej.kaczmarek@codecoup.pl>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Since nRF52840 DK is available for quite some time now, I was going to
> > rename "nrf52840pdk" to "nrf52840dk" so it matches current version.
> > However, it is a good moment to change naming scheme for all dev kits
> > from Nordic and use board name (e.g. PCA10056) instead of dev kit name
> > (e.g. nRF52840 DK). There are at least two good reasons for this:
> >
> > 1. avoid possible renames in future once new revision of dev kit is
> > launched (PDK -> DK) since this is the same board, just with a
> > different revision
> > 2. make selection of proper BSP easier since each board has its name
> > clearly visible on a sticker (note that BSP description states both
> > names)
> >
> > I created a PR which does such rename:
> > https://github.com/apache/mynewt-core/pull/1348
> >
> > Thoughs? Are there any good reasons why we should not rename it?
> > (except for historical reasons :P)
> >
> > Best,
> > Andrzej
> >
>
Re: [RFC] BSP rename for Nordic dev kit
Posted by Miguel Azevedo <mi...@gmail.com>.
I agree that we should use the board name instead of the kit name, if dk is
the same board as pdk.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2018, 15:12 Andrzej Kaczmarek, <an...@codecoup.pl>
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Since nRF52840 DK is available for quite some time now, I was going to
> rename "nrf52840pdk" to "nrf52840dk" so it matches current version.
> However, it is a good moment to change naming scheme for all dev kits
> from Nordic and use board name (e.g. PCA10056) instead of dev kit name
> (e.g. nRF52840 DK). There are at least two good reasons for this:
>
> 1. avoid possible renames in future once new revision of dev kit is
> launched (PDK -> DK) since this is the same board, just with a
> different revision
> 2. make selection of proper BSP easier since each board has its name
> clearly visible on a sticker (note that BSP description states both
> names)
>
> I created a PR which does such rename:
> https://github.com/apache/mynewt-core/pull/1348
>
> Thoughs? Are there any good reasons why we should not rename it?
> (except for historical reasons :P)
>
> Best,
> Andrzej
>