Hi Xiang, On 5/22/20, Xiang Xiao <xiaoxiang781...@gmail.com> wrote: sic > > But mbedtls can be used in more context than HTTPS/TLS like security > boot, OTA and TEE, it doesn't make sense to put into netutils. A > central folder(e.g. external) for 3rd party is a better choice > because:
The external folder is used for other purpose (to test user own code). Not it is even in the .gitignore. And since the code will be there already, it is better to keep the way NuttX already to it for external application. > 1.New user can find what already provide by NuttX quickly before start > porting Normally new users will look inside menuconfig before looking the code, so it is not an appealing reason. > 2.Help PMC check LICENSE file reflect the truth It doesn't better since the code is not distributed inside NuttX. > 3.Follow other project practice > Hmm, so I think I didn't get it correctly from start. Maybe your idea is to keep the complete code inside an apps/external or apps/thirdparty folder, is it? If this is the idea, maybe in this case other option is to have an apps-external or thirdparty repository to avoid the apps/ repository becoming too big with code from external projects. >> > 4. how do you think about adding tls support to netutils/webclient? >> > >> >> I think it is better to create the mbedtls as a separated "library" >> (note the quotes) instead of mixing it directly inside webclient, >> because it could make it easier to users to use mbedtls on their web >> applications. But, of course, it should be nice to have an option to >> compile the webclient with the mbedtls "library" support. There are >> some examples of "libraries" and applications on NuttX apps, i.e.: >> gpsutils/minmea/minmea.c and an application using it: examples/gps. >> > > Yes, mbedtls is better to integrate as a library, and then any builtin > or 3rd party apps can utilize it. > I suppose this is the way you did at Xiaomi, right? BR, Alan
