Skip to content
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

How to manage boards with many revision? #188

Closed
jeromecoutant opened this issue Jan 12, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

How to manage boards with many revision? #188

jeromecoutant opened this issue Jan 12, 2023 · 5 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request In Discussion Discussion for this issue is open and ongoing

Comments

@jeromecoutant
Copy link

Hi

https://open-cmsis-pack.github.io/Open-CMSIS-Pack-Spec/main/html/pdsc_boards_pg.html#element_boards

If one board have many revision, but each revision impact only 1 of the feature,
it seems we need to duplicate all the board structure for the new revision (and new uuid).

Maybe we could find a way to avoid this and to create a board level with all common information,
and then a sub level for revision ?

@jkrech jkrech added enhancement New feature or request In Discussion Discussion for this issue is open and ongoing labels Jan 12, 2023
@jkrech
Copy link
Member

jkrech commented Jan 17, 2023

Your request reminds me of device variants that we introduced in the specification a long time ago. So the concept by which common information is inherited rather than repeated has been recognized as a means of reducing redundancy. At the same time we find that people generating this information from other sources do not benefit much and it can be harder to read.
I am also worried about existing tools being unable to correctly process this new board description format. I could also imagine that it maybe favorable to release a separate new board support pack for each new board revision assuming that previous revisions won't require any update at all.

@jeromecoutant
Copy link
Author

@avilei

@avilei
Copy link

avilei commented Jan 27, 2023

It's an interesting proposal. Of course we would need to find the right trade-off between reducing redundancy on the one hand, and improving tools efficiency and back compatibility on the other hand.
I'm also adding @silviooliva to the discussion.

@jkrech
Copy link
Member

jkrech commented Mar 21, 2023

@avilei and @silviooliva I think we are awaiting a proposal from you otherwise this will stay in deferred state.

@avilei
Copy link

avilei commented Mar 21, 2023

Hi @jkrech, for the time being I think we can keep the PDSC schema like this. If we start to see a great deal of duplicated information, then we can reopen the issue.

@jkrech jkrech closed this as completed Mar 22, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request In Discussion Discussion for this issue is open and ongoing
Projects
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants