> I would be happy to delete the whole thing. Adbelatif has offered to > delete the contents as well. But we would need consensus. A few people > writing emails doesn't constitute consensus. That is why we have formal > votes so that everyone's voice is heard and the direction is clear.
We can then create a VOTE thread to decide whether we want to delete it or not (can we consider this one as a DISCUSS thread?) > And there should be some position about where and how we provide OS tool > support. If not github.com/nuttx, then where? We've been told before that we can host well known projects even if they are in an incompatible license. We discussed moving them to Apache. I'm not sure if we want to revive that discussion as it always went unnoticed, but it would be ideal to have all the necessary repositories in one place. Otherwise, github.com/nuttx would be a good place, maybe we can also change the name to something similar to what Alin suggested above. On Sun, Oct 17, 2021 at 2:45 PM Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Either way is fine, but we need action now. I have seen the same topic > > happen on the email list many times, but nothing happens after that > >discussion. > > I would be happy to delete the whole thing. Adbelatif has offered to > delete the contents as well. But we would need consensus. A few people > writing emails doesn't constitute consensus. That is why we have formal > votes so that everyone's voice is heard and the direction is clear. > > With regard to the trademark usage, it would be good to get PPMC feedback > on that. Perhaps they would have a clear position. I don't really know if > there is an issue here or not... certainly there is less of an issue here > than with NuttX YouTube, LinkedIN, Discord, and various NuttX named > websites. The bitbucket nuttx repository would have the same trademark > problem, if there is any. > > And there should be some position about where and how we provide OS tool > support. If not github.com/nuttx, then where? Up until now no one has ever > made any change to kconfig-frontends other than to fix compile failures due > to toolchain differences. The only significant change has been to add > Windows Native support and that is not in either the github or bitbucket > repos.
