UVC deployment strategy (for discussion) #33
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tore-espressif
requested review from
igrr,
roma-jam,
leeebo,
Dazza0 and
peter-marcisovsky
roma-jam
approved these changes
Apr 24, 2024
tore-espressif
force-pushed
the
feature/uvc_espressif_fork
branch
from
c978c27 to
3aa9f07
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR changes our libuvc submodule from upstream https://github.com/libuvc/libuvc to Espressif's fork https://github.com/espressif/libuvc
Please note that this deployment strategy is different from TinyUSB, where we release TinyUSB as one component and TinyUSB additions as a second one. This approach brings a lot of maintenance effort, though. So, IMO, this simplified strategy is more suitable for UVC
Opinions welcome!