oxidecomputer / oxidecomputer/hubris
Current policy on upstreaming chip support?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 3.6k
- Forks
- 239
- Avg merge
- 1d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 23
Description
What are your thoughts on merging in additional chip support into this repo at the moment? I have some interest in improving my nRF52832 support, or bringing up support for some of the other boards I have lying around my apartment as I figure out which ones have the necessary hardware for it. I'd be happy to pull request those, but I don't have a full picture on how much overhead (if any) that would impose on your dev workflows, and I guess it could create the image that they're "officially supported" if they're merged in here.
My other idea is to maintain a fork with unofficial chip/board support, in the spirit of "This is some unofficial hubris-compatible stuff, also don't expect me to track upstream at full speed I'm just one girl with a rust compiler".
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No source file, test, or entry point is named. Read the issue and its existing comment thread first, then review how nRF52832 and board support are currently represented in the repository. Done would require a clear maintainer decision on whether such support belongs upstream or in an unofficial fork.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- embedded-iot
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 20/100