Hi All,
After several discussions about HAL usage and community governance
[1][2][3], we (Espressif) propose hosting the current content of `
github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty` under an ASF-hosted repository: `
github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif`.
*What does it mean:*
- `esp-hal-3rdparty` content is already Apache 2.0 licensed.
- Espressif's CCLA allows us to contribute to a newly created
repository: we would create a PR on `
github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif` with `esp-hal-3rdparty` content.
- On the other hand, the org account on `github.com/nuttx` is not
legally attached to Apache Software Foundation and,
consequently, to NuttX.
We can't directly contribute to it.
- NuttX's committers will have (just like `nuttx` and `nuttx-apps`)
write permissions to merge PRs on the newly created repository;
- Espressif will support the community with HAL usage, including a
comprehensive guide on how to update it so that any community member can
send patches for HAL.
- The discussion about HAL governance comes and goes, creating
instability in the NuttX community among members, developers, and vendors.
This is no longer acceptable and needs settlement. That being said:
- `github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty` will no longer receive
direct contributions for now.
- The newly created `apache/nuttx-hal-espressif` - if the community
agrees on that - will enable it to evolve and receive new contributions
with more authority from the community.
- On the other hand, native development is always an option if the
community decides to keep supporting the devices on its own.
*What it doesn't mean:*
- It doesn't mean we are pushing NuttX to accept vendor HALs.
`esp-hal-3rdparty` is a reality, and we want to empower the community to
enable any NuttX member to directly work with it.
- The discussion of whether NuttX should or should not officially
approve vendor HALs is not related to this call for a vote.
This seems to be a *Procedural Issue* [4], and a simple majority should be
applied. The community is encouraged to vote. PMC members have binding
votes.
In that sense, my vote (Tiago) is *+1 *(binding)
References:
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/gf4c3z4ds94lon91op4c6zmclqnwtvcf
[2] https://lists.apache.org/thread/nvnrf30jcdsxcrydmo2s95tdtlj8zvx9
[3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/bg74qn14rs9qwson5lzt0xjb4fvbqh6j
[4] https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting
