Murdock results

✔️ PASSED

df902f0 README.md: add Related Projects

Artifacts

• Documentation preview

There is a typo in the commit message (ad => add). I fixed the PR title already. 👀

ad(vertise)

Compared to the rest of the README.md I'm missing a line break after 80 characters.

Also, I wouldn't put it into the RIOT intro text but rather add an individual headline like "Related projects" or "Spin-offs".

Compared to the rest of the README.md I'm missing a line break after 80 characters.

after pushing the fix for that i realized its not hard at 80 but gladly it is soft (-> first line is 80 but second 83 should be ok)

Also, I wouldn't put it into the RIOT intro text but rather add an individual headline like "Related projects" or "Spin-offs".

even though i don't think the "battery included on par" part in the Ariel OS intro is a bit optimistic ( probably just different kindof batterys), the Ariel OS - Readme refers to RIOT in the intro as well

Also, I wouldn't put it into the RIOT intro text but rather add an individual headline like "Related projects" or "Spin-offs".

even though i don't think SGSOACSthe "battery included on par" part in the Ariel OS intro is a bit optimistic ( probably just different kindof batterys), the Ariel OS - Readme refers to RIOT in the intro as well

For my taste it just looks a bit misplaced here. For Ariel OS it makes more sense since the project is essentially a fork of RIOT OS (community-wise not technically). Also, I like substructure.

I agree with Oleg that a

## Related projects

section makes sense, eg. above or below 'Contribute'. Either way, I like the text as it is proposed now. The link could also go to https://ariel-os.org/, which currently redirects to GitHub but may later spin into a dedicated website.

somehow ariel os having its own subheading far down looks strange
https://github.com/kfessel/RIOT/blob/6a0c3184374975c446b3179bb6acf08674356e0e/README.md
vs
https://github.com/kfessel/RIOT/blob/c31a3b47e39894b19050ba02406f2aaf66040618/README.md

i think its more due to it beeing singular

still strange

Please squash :)

The rust support should IMO be a separate PR

agree with Oleg. even the current proposal is misleading. the current version shouldn't be merged.

the term "offspring" doesn't fit.

it may fit in awesome-riot-os under the caption "Projects inspired by RIOT".

@aabadie: i use f to mark commit i intend to squash / for fixups (spare me off some static noise)

I will squash this PR into a single commit with this message

README.md: add Related Projects

advertize Ariel OS

this evening

Poor @kfessel. Now this got bikeshedded into a direction that has nothing to do with advertising Ariel OS anymore. If no one else wants to start a governance.md, I can prepare something.

https://forum.riot-os.org/t/starting-a-governance-md-document/4431 (for now maintainers and moderators only, but maybe we can involve @jkarinkl into the discussion somehow).

If we really want to put a link to things like Zephyr in the README we should IMO also point out what we consider as the major differences (licensing, community model, memory efficiency?) but that will probably blowup the README quite a bit and I'm not sure we really want to do this. I'm fine with citing other (mostly unrelated) projects but I don't think that a README is the best place to do that.

i sill would replace "offspring" by "spin-off".

Contrary to offspring, spin-off is actually well defined around academia and industry. It means a by-product, an accidental development of something else internal at the project. murdock(-ng), philipp, laze, cosy are spin-offs, side projects doing something different that have been spun off the main project. As Ariel OS was already outside the RIOT organisation before development started, the term spin-off is not accurate here.

i sill would replace "offspring" by "spin-off".

Contrary to offspring, spin-off is actually well defined around academia and industry. It means a by-product, an accidental development of something else internal at the project.

'accidental' is certainly not correct, e.g., Infineon is a spin-off of Siemens: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infineon_Technologies

As Ariel OS was already outside the RIOT organisation before development started, the term spin-off is not accurate here.

Agree. This underlines that Ariel is a project independent of RIOT. Sharing code and ideas is the fundamental concept of Open Source - not specific to Ariel nor special to RIOT. IMO, this boils the discussion down (again) to 'inspired by' - Ariel developers may of course state 'Ariel was inspired by RIOT', if they wish to.

IMO, this boils the discussion down (again) to 'inspired by' - Ariel developers may of course state 'Ariel was inspired by RIOT', if they wish to.

They can and the actually do. Not in the exact wording. As you seem to have a number of suggestions on improving Ariel OS's README: They are open for PRs. Any discussion on Ariel OS's README is much better done there, as there this discussion can actually be acted upon.

The point of this PR is to add a reference to Ariel OS in the README. The arguments against this have been repeated a few times now, with little to no variantion in the reasoning. That does not have seemed to convinced anyone, while at the same time more and more support for adding the reference has been voiced, e.g. in here.

I think it is time to call this a rough consensus and move on.

IMO also point out what we consider as the major differences (licensing, community model, memory efficiency?)

We do have that in the FAQ. We could refer to that in the README.md for those interested in the detailed look. I think adding a small reference does help users who are new to RIOT but know one or more of the references to get what the target group of RIOT is. IMO an in-detail discussion is too long for a README, but adding a ref to such would be IMO quite helpful.

I count three ACKs and overwhelming support in the forum. Let's merge this and refine from there

First refinement PR is open: #21061

This adds a reference to the in-detail comparison between RIOT and other OSes.

@maribu, this merge was too fast. we had somehow a consensus on mentioning related projects, but we didn't have any consensus on the wording regarding Ariel. even you suggested an alternative. just merging is really disappointing.

I have to agree and disagree with @waehlisch here: this was merged too fast but in my opinion we haven't had consensus on mentioning other related projects.
This PR started to add the reference to Ariel OS that was concluded at the summit and proposed to add it to the README.md. And that's what have been acked by three maintainers. After these acks the content of the PR underwent a major change and at least I was not happy with that (as stated in #21052 (comment)). This is IMO not how a PR review should work. Plus: there was no need to rush it.

@maribu, this merge was too fast.

We regularly have more complex PRs with a lot less ACKs and discussions merged faster. Would you mind to elaborate on why you think this was too fast?

That said, if you have ideas on how to improve, PRs are always welcome.

But the ACKs here were not on the changeset that got merged.

We regularly have more complex PRs with a lot less ACKs and discussions merged faster.

Especially when it comes to code PRs (yes, this is “just” a doc PR), this sounds more like a bad symptom than an argument... I share @OlegHahm's analysis how the ACKs went. None where after the latest set of changes.

Additionally, there were complaints in the past [few days!] of PRs being ACK'd by mentors/advisors/colleagues and disregarding if I like the content of this PR or how the discussion went or not, there is a certain bad look to it, that 2/3 ACKs came from colleagues of the author and the third ACK from one of the founder/leaders of Ariel OS.

@maribu, this merge was too fast.

We regularly have more complex PRs with a lot less ACKs and discussions merged faster. Would you mind to elaborate on why you think this was too fast?

I don't think so: decorating the front readme with a (IMO completely misplaced) random selection of related projects does not look good. In other words: This operation has been much more complex than apparently perceived.