Skip to content
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

Format all files to current ns-3 .clang-format rules #138

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 12, 2023

Conversation

non-det-alle
Copy link
Collaborator

Apply ns-3 .clang-format rules to all files of the module using ns-3's check-style-clang-format.py.
No additional changes beyond formatting.

This merge is meant to break up a previous huge pull request into more digestible pieces.

@pagmatt pagmatt self-assigned this Oct 12, 2023
@pagmatt pagmatt merged commit da17109 into signetlabdei:develop Oct 12, 2023
0 of 2 checks passed
@non-det-alle non-det-alle deleted the formatting branch October 12, 2023 11:42
@non-det-alle
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@pagmatt If it's ok for you, now I'll focus on restoring github workflows on the line of the ones of ns-3.

@pagmatt
Copy link
Member

pagmatt commented Oct 12, 2023

Makes sense to me! How do you plan to do that? Fork on Gitlab the ns-3 repo and set this as a submodule, or define the CI here? I believe we may run out of CI time if we do it here for all the ns-3 mainline CI actions

@non-det-alle
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The problem I see with the submodule option is that CI actions would not run automatically for MRs. It would require an additional fetch & commit from the ns-3 fork perspective to activate the CI actions there, right? And this would only work on changes already merged, so contributors would not be able to fix the problems directly in the MR.

I propose we first try to fix the CI here. I was thinking of cutting down the number of actions in the main ns-3 repo. For instance, we can start by running them exclusively on ubuntu images with a single compiler (as they are now) and focus on building, testing, formatting and documentation.

@pagmatt
Copy link
Member

pagmatt commented Oct 12, 2023

The MR one is a good point.
Let's try to fix the CI here then, ideally I'd like to keep publishing the documentation on Github pages as well. I can take care of that myself actually.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants