You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For example some paths have different styles of naming...:
CORE-V CVA5, CORE-V-MCU SoC
and then we have
CVA6, SDK
which don't have context... surely the CVA6 should be CORE-V CVA6 etc or is it not a CORE-V?
or in fact if this whole tree is under core-v-docs - do any need the CORE-V prefix
or are their likely to be non core-v items?
Also - Verilator Model - is about MCU - so I should it be a sub project of MCU or it should be renamed MCU Verilator model or something...
somebody needs to take a clean look and use a holistic naming convention...
[but it is great all these things are in this place]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think some of the entries in https://github.com/openhwgroup/core-v-docs/tree/master/program/Project%20Descriptions%20and%20Plans should be renamed.
It really is about consistency.
For example some paths have different styles of naming...:
CORE-V CVA5, CORE-V-MCU SoC
and then we have
CVA6, SDK
which don't have context... surely the CVA6 should be CORE-V CVA6 etc or is it not a CORE-V?
or in fact if this whole tree is under core-v-docs - do any need the CORE-V prefix
or are their likely to be non core-v items?
Also - Verilator Model - is about MCU - so I should it be a sub project of MCU or it should be renamed MCU Verilator model or something...
somebody needs to take a clean look and use a holistic naming convention...
[but it is great all these things are in this place]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: