New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Rename nanostack configuration (.cfg) files #7780

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Aug 21, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
10 participants
@artokin
Contributor

artokin commented Aug 13, 2018

Description

  • Rename nanostack configuration files .cfg to .h files to fix #7615.
  • Update license and copyright years in configuration files.

Pull request type

[x] Fix
[ ] Refactor
[ ] Target update
[ ] Feature
[ ] Breaking change

artokin added some commits Aug 13, 2018

Merge commit 'f292d7ad9ab5da89381d7f54de88b46df573c79d'
* commit 'f292d7ad9ab5da89381d7f54de88b46df573c79d':
  Squashed 'features/nanostack/sal-stack-nanostack/' changes from 4a188ea..7963594
Squashed 'features/nanostack/sal-stack-nanostack/' changes from 4a188…
…ea..7963594

7963594 Merge branch 'release_internal' into release_external
9e31d11 Update apache license to config-files (#1781)
b8f840c Merge branch 'release_internal' into release_external
9495d94 Rename cfg-files to h-files (#1780)

git-subtree-dir: features/nanostack/sal-stack-nanostack
git-subtree-split: 7963594d0bdb48d2f1c40db7a4fc597bb2f78a65
@artokin

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

artokin commented Aug 13, 2018

@SeppoTakalo , @kjbracey-arm , @deepakvenugopal , @mikter would you please review?

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

cmonr commented Aug 13, 2018

@artokin Thanks for providing the PR.

However, would you mind updating the commit such that the files that were moved don't appear as newly created files? It's the difference between doing a git mv <file> vs git rm <file>; git commit; git add <file>

Doing git mv preserves the file history.

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

cmonr commented Aug 13, 2018

Could you also update the commit description, since the commits indicate more changes than just those to fix the issue?

@artokin

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

artokin commented Aug 13, 2018

@cmonr , all the files were changed similary using git mv <file>, no new files were created. Could it be so that github tool shows some file as new file instead of rename?

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

cmonr commented Aug 13, 2018

...huh. Interesting. I wonder if the squash commit could have something to do with it.

@geky

This comment has been minimized.

Member

geky commented Aug 13, 2018

It looks like, besides merges, there's only two commits on the subtree. Can you cherry-pick those commits onto a new branch based on master? This is required to make it into a patch release. Future subtree merges will not have any conflicts if the cherry-picked changes match.

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

cmonr commented Aug 13, 2018

@artokin Conversely, if you don't mind on having this fix wait until 5.10, we can simply move this PR forward asis.

@SeppoTakalo

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

SeppoTakalo commented Aug 14, 2018

@cmonr This change is applied here as a git subtree pull --squash as we have always done with Nanostack changes. We don't want to apply local changes, or cherry-picks into the Git subtree within Mbed OS repository, it might complicate things later on.

From Mbed OS release point of view, it needs to be threaded as a merge commit. Directly applying it as a patch won't work. Anna has been able to apply these changes to patch release as well, so I assume that it works.

And I would prefer if this goes out into the patch release, as the export builds are broken currently.

@kjbracey-arm

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

kjbracey-arm commented Aug 14, 2018

git mv is just a convenience helper and equivalent to removing then adding - Git doesn't actually store any tracking information for moves and copies, it's always deduced by the log viewer. The addition of the licenses makes some of the differences too big to deduce the move in the squashed result - it would have been clearer in the internal repo.

I thought Anna had had problems cherry-picking these subtree merge PRs in the past, although I reckon it should in theory possible by cherry-picking just the merge commit with the -m option.

But as this follows the already-merged 5.10 release PR won't the 5.9 backport likely conflict anyway? So maybe it would be best to make a separate PR targeting the 5.9 branch.

@adbridge

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

adbridge commented Aug 14, 2018

As @kjbracey-arm noted, if this is based on top of changes earmarked for 5.10 then yes we are likely to get merge conflicts, so a separate PR would be best. However I don't like this kind of thing happening in general... Should only be for urgent fixes.

@kjbracey-arm

I think this is okay to go now

@cmonr cmonr added needs: CI and removed needs: work labels Aug 17, 2018

@cmonr

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

cmonr commented Aug 17, 2018

/morph build

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

mbed-ci commented Aug 17, 2018

Build : SUCCESS

Build number : 2832
Build artifacts/logs : http://mbed-os.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/?prefix=builds/7780/

Triggering tests

/morph test
/morph uvisor-test
/morph export-build
/morph mbed2-build

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

@mbed-ci

This comment has been minimized.

@0xc0170

This comment has been minimized.

Member

0xc0170 commented Aug 20, 2018

And I would prefer if this goes out into the patch release, as the export builds are broken currently.

Me as well, will review the release label during today's gatekeeping

@kjbracey-arm

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

kjbracey-arm commented Aug 20, 2018

As this PR is built on previous full release and is all subtree-y, this PR is not pickable to 5.9.6.

But fear not, there's already a 5.9-rebased easily-pickable version here: #7789.

@NirSonnenschein

This comment has been minimized.

Contributor

NirSonnenschein commented Aug 21, 2018

/morph uvisor-test

@cmonr cmonr merged commit b53a9ea into ARMmbed:master Aug 21, 2018

14 checks passed

AWS-CI uVisor Build & Test Success
Details
ci-morph-build build completed
Details
ci-morph-exporter build completed
Details
ci-morph-mbed2-build build completed
Details
ci-morph-test test completed , RTOS ROM(+0.0%) RAM(+0.0%)
Details
continuous-integration/jenkins/pr-head This commit looks good
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
travis-ci/astyle Passed, 583 files
Details
travis-ci/docs Local docs testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/events Passed, runtime is 10501 cycles (+1212 cycles)
Details
travis-ci/gitattributestest Local gitattributestest testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/licence_check Local licence_check testing has passed
Details
travis-ci/littlefs Passed, code size is 9960B (+0.00%)
Details
travis-ci/tools-py2.7 Local tools-py2.7 testing has passed
Details

@artokin artokin deleted the artokin:nsrc510_p1 branch Aug 22, 2018

pan- pushed a commit to pan-/mbed that referenced this pull request Aug 22, 2018

Merge pull request ARMmbed#7780 from artokin/nsrc510_p1
Rename nanostack configuration (.cfg) files
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment