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

Bump rp2040-pac to 0.6 in rtic-monotonics #905

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 21, 2024

Conversation

martinsp
Copy link
Contributor

@martinsp martinsp commented Mar 17, 2024

⚠️ examples/rp2040_local_i2c_init depends on unreleased rp-rs/rp-hal-boards#60

@korken89
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for the PR! Can you have a look at fixing the failing test?

@martinsp
Copy link
Contributor Author

martinsp commented Mar 17, 2024

Looks like this needs to wait for rp-rs/rp-hal-boards#60 otherwise there are two versions of rp204-pac pulled in in the examples/rp2040_local_i2c_init and causes conflicting types.

  • rp2040-pac 0.5 through rp-pico -> rp2040-hal (0.9.2)
  • rp2040-pac 0.6 through rtic-monotonic

@korken89
Copy link
Collaborator

I gave this a look now, I think this is a breaking change no? As this would make the RP2040 monotonic stop working with the older PACs.
We've not set a policy yet on how we see breaking PAC changes, but lets add this to tomorrows meeting.
I'm fine with tracking the latest PACs as the contract of rtic-monotonics but lets see what others think.

Else one needs to add a feature flag for specific PAC version spans as breaking changes come.

Copy link
Collaborator

@korken89 korken89 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Since we will do a major release this is now fine!

@korken89 korken89 added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 21, 2024
Merged via the queue into rtic-rs:master with commit 5d05d60 Apr 21, 2024
55 checks passed
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