-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
ogma-cli
: Present conversion options based on backends
#75
Labels
CR:Status:Closed
Admin only: Change request that has been completed
CR:Type:Bug
Admin only: Change request pertaining to error detected
Milestone
Comments
ivanperez-keera
added
CR:Status:Initiated
Admin only: Change request that has been initiated
CR:Type:Bug
Admin only: Change request pertaining to error detected
labels
Jan 28, 2023
ivanperez-keera
changed the title
Jan 28, 2023
ogma-cli
: Present conversion options based on the frontends and backends without mixing themogma-cli
: Present conversion options based on frontends and backends without mixing them
ivanperez-keera
changed the title
Jan 18, 2024
ogma-cli
: Present conversion options based on frontends and backends without mixing themogma-cli
: Present conversion options based on backends
Change Manager: Confirmed that the issue exists. |
ivanperez-keera
added
CR:Status:Confirmed
Admin only: Change request that has been acknowledged by the change manager
and removed
CR:Status:Initiated
Admin only: Change request that has been initiated
labels
Jan 18, 2024
Technical Lead: Confirmed that the issue should be addressed. |
ivanperez-keera
added
CR:Status:Accepted
Admin only: Change request accepted by technical lead
and removed
CR:Status:Confirmed
Admin only: Change request that has been acknowledged by the change manager
labels
Jan 18, 2024
Technical Lead: Issue scheduled for fixing in Ogma 1.2. Fix assigned to: @ivanperez-keera. |
ivanperez-keera
added
CR:Status:Scheduled
Admin only: Change requested scheduled
and removed
CR:Status:Accepted
Admin only: Change request accepted by technical lead
labels
Jan 18, 2024
ivanperez-keera
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 18, 2024
The README is too focused on the frontends, but most users will mostly care about the backends. This commit re-structures the README around the targets or backends, which are the ones what most users will care the most about.
ivanperez-keera
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 18, 2024
ivanperez-keera
added
CR:Status:Implementation
Admin only: Change request that is currently being implemented
and removed
CR:Status:Scheduled
Admin only: Change requested scheduled
labels
Jan 18, 2024
Implementor: Solution implemented, review requested. |
ivanperez-keera
added
CR:Status:Verification
Admin only: Change request that is currently being verified
and removed
CR:Status:Implementation
Admin only: Change request that is currently being implemented
labels
Jan 18, 2024
Change Manager: Verified that:
|
Change Manager: Implementation ready to be merged. |
ivanperez-keera
added
CR:Status:Closed
Admin only: Change request that has been completed
and removed
CR:Status:Verification
Admin only: Change request that is currently being verified
labels
Jan 18, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
CR:Status:Closed
Admin only: Change request that has been completed
CR:Type:Bug
Admin only: Change request pertaining to error detected
Description
The sections of the README list conversion of FRET files first, then the cFS command, then the C structs conversion, then the ROS command.
This presentation is partly misleading, since FRET commands can also be fed to some backends.
A better way to present the information would be to list the backends available (conversion to Copilot/stand-alone C, conversion to cFS, conversion to ROS, conversion to FPrime), giving examples of the input formats.
Type
Additional context
None.
Requester
Method to check presence of bug
The issue is with the documentation. There is no good, simple automated way to check that it is correct.
Because it's not a programming issue, visual inspection is OK.
Expected result
The README file is structured around the backends and features, rather than the inputs.
Desired result
The README file is structured around the backends and features, rather than the inputs.
Proposed solution
Lay out elements in README as follows:
Further notes
None.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: