-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 376
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
🏗 Integrate open PRs 🚧 #486
Comments
@sbernard31 Proposal:
|
@rettichschnidi, It sounds a good idea, but should we integrate "our" PR first ? I mean PR written by you and your teammates and @sbertin-telular. The idea is to avoid that too many people resolve conflict at the same time and so by the way generate new one ? (I'm not sure I'm clear 🤔)
We can ask to politely squash commit and also say that if they can not we will do it (once PR is rebased without conflict, it's easy to squash.) About recommendation, I will create an issue to discuss about creating/adding all "classic" community documentation. |
@sbertin-telular, @rettichschnidi, Do you want to review your PR each other before I integrate it in master ? or for those old PRs I can merge it without review ? |
I think it would be good for them to be reviewed. I'm not sure if they've had much of a review before now. |
#423 is integrated. Let's go for the next one. |
#430 is integrated. Let's go for the next one. |
#432 is next. |
#432 is integrated. Let's go for the next one. (I'm a kind of github robot 🤖) |
I noticed i have to rebase #461 . There has also been an internal code review from some of the embedded developers in a different department for their patch set from an older version of wakaama. Not all is related to #461 but other parts could possible be reported as bugs I guess? The person who has done this as part of his assignment will not be available to report here as he is leaving for another assignment next week, but I will make sure we get it in to the code review, either by me or some colleague of mine. |
#435 is integrated. Let's go for the next one. |
#446 is integrated. Let's go for the next one. |
Most of my remaining changes for LWM2M 1.1 started from the assumption that #431 would be merged first. I don't have PRs open for those changes yet. Do we want to skip #431 for now and I'll adjust my changes or get it merged? I do think it helps with understanding the structure of the code vs having everything under core. |
I just look at #431, it is a code reorg/refactoring. Currently this PR is not in mergeable state (lot of conflicts). As this is a lot of file moves, I suspect resolving conflicts will be pretty much the same effort than rewrite it. Anyway in all case I think maybe you should create a new PR (then cherry-picked david's commit or rewrite it on your own). Maybe before to do that we should see if there is not PR (not specially yours) which could be easier to integrate before ? WDYT ? |
@tuve I'm looking into it already. Found some issues and would like to convince myself that it works as intended. |
5 opened PR left. We are on good track. 👍 |
It is good with clarity on what issues that must be fixed together with block transfer #461 and what can be fixed after it has been merged |
@sbertin-telular @sbernard31 what is remaining to implement in order to have lwm2m 1.1 functionality once #461 and "your branch" is delivered? Can we make a plan for a 1.1 release (content and testing). An official release (with good quality) will send a strong signal to the community. |
@qleisan, I suppose this is the roadmap item(6.) from #488. Once you agree on it. Either we keep the issue as roadmap or you can create wiki dedicated page(s). Just as an example at Leshan side we have this : |
By the way as soon as #461 is merged, I understand that #431 should be the next one. (@sbertin-telular is on it if I'm not wrong) |
#461 is integrated. @sbertin-telular #431 is still the next one in the plan ? |
It has been a long time since I've seen no open pull requests. Good to see it. I'll start working to create more with my LWM2M 1.1 changes. |
Just to let you know that currently, I integrate PR as soon as I get 1 approval. If you think I should do differently, maybe waiting 1 day(or more) after approval to let a chance to get more review, let me know 🙏 ! |
Do we still need this issue or can I close it now ? |
I think it is ok to close this issue, the major PR:s have been coordinated and merged |
There is a lot of open PR, this issue aims to centralize discussion about integrating this PR in master to put the project back on track.
Following @sbertin-telular, the first one should be : #423.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: