I really like this idea, it will make it much easier to enforce documentation with PRs. When I wrote the syslogd app I'm fairly sure my kernel changes (nuttx repo) got merged with the docs a few days before the application was actually merged, which meant that for a few days there was documentation for a non-existent app on the website.
I'm not sure how difficult it would be for the website build CI to pull documentation from two places. It would also make it difficult to link to application docs from inside relevant kernel docs. I think those issues would be deal breakers unless they can be solved. Matteo On Thu, Jul 3, 2025, 3:17 PM Nathan Hartman <hartman.nat...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Right now, Documentation is in the main nuttx repository [1]. > > However, some of the Documentation there pertains to the nuttx-apps > repository. One current example is PR #16665 in nuttx repo, which is > documenting the new Xedge example located in the nuttx-apps repo. > > I think it's a little bit messy to have documentation in nuttx repo for > things that belong in nuttx-apps repo. One disadvantage is that repos can > get out-of-sync. Another disadvantage is that NuttX users are not required > to use nuttx-apps repo. They can supply their own. But, they will have > Documentation about things in nuttx-apps repo. That could be confusing > because they might see something in Documentation but will not be able to > find it. > > I suggest to create a Documentation in nuttx-apps repo and move all > apps-related docs there. So nuttx/Documentation will only document things > in the nuttx repo, and nuttx-apps/Documentation will only document things > in the nuttx-apps repo. If we do this refactoring, it will mean that the > website will need an update also, to pull docs from both sources > (nuttx/Documentation and nuttx-apps/Documentation). > > Thoughts? > > [1] https://github.com/apache/nuttx > > [2] https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/16665 > > [3] https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/pull/3120 > > Cheers, > Nathan >
