nuttxpr commented on PR #15224: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/15224#issuecomment-2547466126
[**\[Experimental Bot, please feedback here\]**](https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Aapache%2Fnuttx+13552&type=issues) No, this PR does not fully meet the NuttX requirements. While it attempts to address the sections, it lacks crucial details. Here's a breakdown of the deficiencies: * **Summary:** "no functional changes are intended" is insufficient. Even refactoring or code style changes need justification. Explain *why* these changes are being made. What problem are they solving (e.g., improving readability, maintainability, removing dead code)? Specify which files or modules are affected. * **Impact:** All the impact sections are left blank. Even if the answer is "NO" for each, it should be explicitly stated (e.g., "Impact on user: NO"). If there are truly *no* impacts whatsoever, then the summary should clearly explain why the changes are needed despite having zero impact. * **Testing:** "build tested sim:lua on macOS with a few local changes in apps" is inadequate. "A few local changes" needs to be explicitly documented. Without knowing the nature of those changes, the testing results are unreliable. The testing logs are also empty. Provide *actual* log output demonstrating the behavior before and after the change, even if the change is non-functional. If the changes are purely related to code style, provide justification for why runtime testing isn't applicable (e.g., changes only affect comments/formatting). In short, the PR needs to provide significantly more detail to meet the requirements. Even if the changes are seemingly minor, a clear and comprehensive explanation is crucial for proper review and integration. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
