Add support for ESP32-H2

[dwhitlow]

Feedback from #1347 requested that H2 and C2 support be split up into separate PRs. I've created this separate PR based on @laur123 's work and his fork of this repo.

Please let me know if any further work is necessary to get this merged.

[Jason2866]

Is not fully correct. Missing an entry. Should be:

    "core": "esp32",
    "f_cpu": "96000000L",
    "f_flash": "64000000L",
    "f_image": "48000000L",
    "flash_mode": "qio",
    "mcu": "esp32h2",
    "variant": "esp32h2"

[dwhitlow]

Thanks @Jason2866 ! I'll push these changes shortly. Anything else I should update or add to get this approved?

[Jason2866]

I am not related to Platformio. A user like you. Providing now and than a PR ;-)

[dwhitlow]

@valeros apologies for the ping, but is there a process I need to follow to get this reviewed by a maintainer? I was unable to find any sort of contribution guidelines or documentation.

[robertlipe]

PlatformIO is seemingly not merging even user-contributed PRs for ESP32 as a negotiation tactic described in many places, but centering around #1225 (which is not exactly in an unbiased audience)

Currently the best you can hope is that your open PR here can be found by others and integrated into their own trees at will, so thank you for helping move affairs forward.

It's not a great situation (I, too, am just a user) but that's the current situation as I understand it.

[raphael-bmec-co]

@robertlipe

PlatformIO is seemingly not merging even user-contributed PRs for ESP32 as a negotiation tactic

Are they really doing this? 😠

[robertlipe]

Yep, @raphael-bmec-co , it's a mess. Look at the merge history.

See the link at the top of https://github.com/pioarduino/platform-espressif32 for the full story. That project itself is a fork of platdoemio/esp32Arduino meant to keep things moving since these two companies are holding their users hostage in business negotiations.

[raphael-bmec-co]

Right. I've been involved in the ongoing discussions. These seemed to be progressing with a degree of good faith. Blocking pull requests however is disappointing behaviour. Good to see things are moving ahead, l hope the community has enough steam to keep these forks going 🤞 Will contribute what and where we can.

[robertlipe]

I've not looked at it it in a while, but I dug through the review queue for both outstanding and submitted work and it was then clear that nobody with write authority was Even willing to click the merge button if esp32 was mentioned. Clearly a bargaining move. Even when others do the work and submit a PR they're not going in. Not cool. The whole situation has me looking at exit strategies from pio. Somehow, the choice of pio as an ide marries a project to ancient compilers ("current" gcc is 2018 in pio, so good luck with c++20 or 23), a ridiculously slow build system, and out of date/now effectively unmaintained libraries. Of course, new chip support is suffering. It's a mess. Things are moving ahead because people that need it have routed around the problem to keep their own projects viable. Respect and appreciation to those involved!

…

On Tue, Aug 20, 2024, 2:42 PM Raphael Smith ***@***.***> wrote: Right. I've been involved in the ongoing discussions. These seemed to be progressing with a degree of good faith. Blocking pull requests however is *disappointing* behaviour. Good to see things are moving ahead, l hope the community has enough steam to keep these forks going 🤞 Will contribute what and where we can. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1423 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACCSD35APADQNZ2X3SZK5V3ZSOLZDAVCNFSM6AAAAABKYCKUN2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDEOJZGYZTENJXGM> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[dwhitlow]

I'm going to close this PR and focus on the community-maintained fork. Thanks @robertlipe and esphome community members for pointing out this alternative!