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

Add wamr to esp-idf components registry. #3264

Conversation

donghengqaz
Copy link
Contributor

@donghengqaz donghengqaz commented Mar 28, 2024

Espressif has ESP-IDF component registry to manage external components, and developers can use this directly and easily.

I plan to add wasm-micro-runtime to this registry, but it seems that wasm-micro-runtime team will not plan to cost much resource to maintain ESP-IDF platform and its related things, so I discuss with some internal Espressif developers. We hope you approve to let us publish WAMR into this registry with specific version(not WAMR official version). If some patches need to add for ESP-IDF platform, I will raised PR here, and when this PR is merged, I publish new version to registry.

If you want to register account in this registry, please add me into your namespace with necessary access permissions, otherwise we plan to use our own account to publish WAMR.

@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
version: "0.1.0"
Copy link
Contributor

@wenyongh wenyongh Mar 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Must this file be put under the root directory? There are already many files under root dir now.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, this is need to be under the root directory, but version can be WAMR version plus bugfix version, for example now WAMR version is 1.3.2, we can make this to be 1.3.2-x(x is bugfix version is needed).

CMakeLists.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@donghengqaz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@wenyongh Today we have a meeting about this, we would like to use release branch of WAMR, because we may use this in real product, so master branch is not good choice, so I plan to merge this into release/v1.3.x version.

@donghengqaz donghengqaz force-pushed the tools/add_to_esp_idf_components_registry branch from f5df650 to f61cdf4 Compare March 29, 2024 07:58
@donghengqaz donghengqaz changed the base branch from main to release/1.3.x March 29, 2024 07:58
@lum1n0us
Copy link
Collaborator

@donghengqaz here are some questions to make sure we are on the same page.

  • Please be awarded of that 1.3.x branch will be out of maintenance in the end of this year(2024).
  • I noticed this PR will be merged only in 1.3.x but not in both (main and 1.3.x). If we all hope a smooth upgrade from 1.3.x to 2.x in next year(2025) after termination of 1.3.x branch, it should be better to merge both and maintain both
  • Since we are not sure you are the only customer depends on 1.3.x branch, there might be following PRs from them too. I guess a 1.3.x release is better than "the latest commit of 1.3.x branch". So, what's your opinion about make a new 1.3.x release recently?

@donghengqaz donghengqaz force-pushed the tools/add_to_esp_idf_components_registry branch from f61cdf4 to db3b2ab Compare April 1, 2024 02:28
@donghengqaz
Copy link
Contributor Author

donghengqaz commented Apr 1, 2024

Hi @lum1n0us,

I noticed this PR will be merged only in 1.3.x but not in both (main and 1.3.x). If we all hope a smooth upgrade from 1.3.x to 2.x in next year(2025) after termination of 1.3.x branch, it should be better to merge both and maintain both

You are right, and I will add another PR for main, but it had better to be published when v2.0 is released, because all versions in the registry are released, you can see they have a version filed.

At first we plan to publish version based on WAMR release branch, because some internal developers and customers need a stable version to start developing product software.

Since we are not sure you are the only customer depends on 1.3.x branch, there might be following PRs from them too. I guess a 1.3.x release is better than "the latest commit of 1.3.x branch". So, what's your opinion about make a new 1.3.x release recently?

Yes, this is very well. I will continue to publish new version to registry, you can see WAMR version in registry as follows:

1.3.2-1

The 1.3.2 is WAMR tag version based on release version, and -1 is bugfix version which is new patch
merged into release branch. If recently WAMR v1.3.3 is released, I will publish it into registry with version 1.3.3-0.

@wenyongh
Copy link
Contributor

wenyongh commented Apr 1, 2024

@donghengqaz the CI runs failed since the wamr-ide CI issue isn't fixed yet (which is fixed in main branch), I submitted PR #3268 to fix the issues that were fixed in main branch, and will merge your PR after that PR is merged. And after that, we may try to create release 1.3.3.

@wenyongh
Copy link
Contributor

wenyongh commented Apr 3, 2024

@donghengqaz I have merged PR #3268, could you rebase it? BTW, could you submit another PR to main branch?

@donghengqaz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@donghengqaz I have merged PR #3268, could you rebase it? BTW, could you submit another PR to main branch?

OK. In the main branch, which version in file idf_component.yml can I use, is 1.3.3 OK?

@donghengqaz donghengqaz force-pushed the tools/add_to_esp_idf_components_registry branch from db3b2ab to 759835f Compare April 7, 2024 09:59
@donghengqaz donghengqaz force-pushed the tools/add_to_esp_idf_components_registry branch from 759835f to 8c7f428 Compare April 7, 2024 10:03
@wenyongh wenyongh merged commit 4109fce into bytecodealliance:release/1.3.x Apr 7, 2024
405 checks passed
@wenyongh
Copy link
Contributor

wenyongh commented Apr 7, 2024

@donghengqaz I have merged PR #3268, could you rebase it? BTW, could you submit another PR to main branch?

OK. In the main branch, which version in file idf_component.yml can I use, is 1.3.3 OK?

The next planned release version in main is 2.0.0, maybe you can use it in idf_component.yml?

@donghengqaz donghengqaz deleted the tools/add_to_esp_idf_components_registry branch April 7, 2024 10:59
@donghengqaz
Copy link
Contributor Author

@donghengqaz I have merged PR #3268, could you rebase it? BTW, could you submit another PR to main branch?

OK. In the main branch, which version in file idf_component.yml can I use, is 1.3.3 OK?

The next planned release version in main is 2.0.0, maybe you can use it in idf_component.yml?

OK.

wenyongh pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2024
This PR is for the main branch, but only the released branch will be pushed
into Espressif component registry.

See also similar fixes in branch release/1.3.x:
#3264
#3288
victoryang00 pushed a commit to victoryang00/wamr-aot-gc-checkpoint-restore that referenced this pull request May 1, 2024
This PR is for the main branch, but only the released branch will be pushed
into Espressif component registry.

See also similar fixes in branch release/1.3.x:
bytecodealliance#3264
bytecodealliance#3288
victoryang00 pushed a commit to victoryang00/wamr-aot-gc-checkpoint-restore that referenced this pull request May 2, 2024
This PR is for the main branch, but only the released branch will be pushed
into Espressif component registry.

See also similar fixes in branch release/1.3.x:
bytecodealliance#3264
bytecodealliance#3288

Signed-off-by: victoryang00 <victoryang00@ucsc.edu>
victoryang00 pushed a commit to victoryang00/wamr-aot-gc-checkpoint-restore that referenced this pull request May 27, 2024
This PR is for the main branch, but only the released branch will be pushed
into Espressif component registry.

See also similar fixes in branch release/1.3.x:
bytecodealliance#3264
bytecodealliance#3288
victoryang00 pushed a commit to victoryang00/wamr-aot-gc-checkpoint-restore that referenced this pull request May 27, 2024
This PR is for the main branch, but only the released branch will be pushed
into Espressif component registry.

See also similar fixes in branch release/1.3.x:
bytecodealliance#3264
bytecodealliance#3288

Signed-off-by: victoryang00 <victoryang00@ucsc.edu>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants