Ugh, isn't that single -1 blocks the vote pass? Alan I think in this particular situation it is worth giving +1 here.. would it be possible for you to reconsider and give +1 please? :-)
-- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info On Wed, Oct 7, 2026, 15:02 Tiago Medicci Serrano <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > 72 hours have already passed, so I'm closing this call for a vote and its > results: > > We had 3+ (me, Tomek, and Alin) and 1- (Alan). As a *procedural Issue*, a > simple majority is enough. So it has *passed*. > > We are working towards meeting ASF requirements in the coming days. > > Best regards, > > Em seg., 5 de out. de 2026 às 12:54, Tiago Medicci Serrano < > [email protected]> escreveu: > > > Hi, > > > > As mentioned earlier, https://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty/ is > > used only by NuttX. > > > > Best regards, > > > > Em seg., 5 de out. de 2026 às 11:33, Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> > > escreveu: > > > >> Hi Tiago, > >> > >> I think we made a mistake when we said that Espressif had already signed > >> the SGA. > >> > >> That SGA was for software Espressif was contributing to the NuttX > >> mainline. > >> > >> For the HAL, the situation is different. If Espressif signs an SGA for > >> their HAL it means Espressif is donating their HAL to ASF, the same way > >> Greg donated NuttX to ASF. > >> > >> By doing so, Espressif will not have rights over its own HAL (same way > >> Greg > >> has no rights to NuttX now). > >> > >> Are you sure Espressif agrees on that? If so, Espressif and the Linux > >> Foundation need to agree that ASF will be the owner of the HAL. > >> > >> BR, > >> > >> Alan > >> > >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2026 at 9:58 AM Tiago Medicci Serrano < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > Just addressing the last comments: > >> > > >> > 1. We can't say anything about other vendors. This is how we proposed > to > >> > host Espressif's HAL: under the Apache umbrella because we already > have > >> a > >> > signed CCLA. *Keep in mind that this call for a vote is about > >> Espressif's > >> > HAL only*. > >> > 2. It's being contributed to a separate repository because: > >> > 2.1 It eases new contributions and new syncs being contributed by > >> > Espressif. > >> > 2.2 The HAL has its own coding style and contribution guide. > >> > 2.3 It makes it easier to implement native implementations and isolate > >> them > >> > from the HAL. > >> > > >> > Please, keep voting on the proposed subject. Nothing else is being > >> > discussed here (we have other threads to discuss it). > >> > > >> > Best regards, > >> > > >> > Em sáb., 3 de out. de 2026 às 09:11, Alan C. Assis <[email protected] > > > >> > escreveu: > >> > > >> > > Hi Tomek, > >> > > > >> > > These are the issues I'm seeing here: > >> > > > >> > > 1) If Espressif donates its HAL to ASF it means they will no longer > >> own > >> > the > >> > > HAL (you cannot have your cake and eat it too). Is this acceptable > to > >> > them? > >> > > > >> > > 2) Even if they accept this, other vendors probably will not accept > >> > > donating their HALs. In this case we cannot keep it under ASF. > >> > > If so, we would have to place it elsewhere, which would cause > >> confusion: > >> > > why are some HALs under ASF and others in a different location? > >> > > > >> > > BR, > >> > > > >> > > Alan > >> > > > >> > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 10:27 PM Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hey there Alan, > >> > > > > >> > > > Most of the raised HAL related issues should be solved that way as > >> > > > proposed by Tiago and Espressif in this vote: > >> > > > 1. Code ownership and supply chain security (mentioned by Alin). > >> > > > 2. Community involvement in faster PR processing (mentioned by > >> Felipe). > >> > > > 3. We should have more control and impact on the HAL quality and > >> > > > availability (mentioned by many). > >> > > > 4. HAL is under the NuttX umbrella just as proposed "Zephyr > Umbrella > >> > > > Way" (mentioned by Renesas). > >> > > > > >> > > > From I understand Espressif offers to "donate" HAL to ASF to be > >> > > > apache/nuttx-hal-espressif and this seems the best possible > win-win > >> > > > scenario. They don't have to do this but they want - big thank > you! > >> > > > > >> > > > What obstacles do you see here? The vote here is about "Hosting > >> > > > Espressif HAL under Apache umbrella" not all HALs. We have perfect > >> > > > road paving here and good example for others. If we have problem > >> with > >> > > > other HAL then we vote other thing. But why block good solution > >> > > > because of other possible bad solutions? > >> > > > > >> > > > We may one day consider Tiers as proposed by Michal and mentioned > by > >> > > > Nathan (with FreeBSD): > >> > > > 1. Tier 1 - in tree code drivers. > >> > > > 2. Tier 2 - HAL that is under ASF and our control. <-- we are > voting > >> > > > this scenario here. > >> > > > 3. Tier 3 - HAL that is external and out of our control (not rally > >> > > > welcome). > >> > > > > >> > > > Could you please reconsider your vote for this particular case / > >> > > > scenario that is being voted? It seems that Espressif listened > >> > > > carefully and provides best possible scenario :-) > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks :-) > >> > > > Tomek > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info > >> > > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 3:10 PM Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -1 > >> > > > > > >> > > > > As I explained before we cannot keep all HALs under ASF. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > BR, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Alan > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2026 at 10:31 AM Tiago Medicci Serrano < > >> > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > 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` > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > > > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > > > > > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> under an > >> ASF-hosted > >> > > > > > repository: ` > >> > > > > > github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif` > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > > > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > > > > > <http://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` > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > > > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> > >> > > > > > <http://github.com/apache/nuttx-hal-espressif> with > >> > > `esp-hal-3rdparty` > >> > > > > > content. > >> > > > > > - On the other hand, the org account on ` > >> github.com/nuttx` <http://github.com/nuttx> <http://github.com/nuttx> > >> > <http://github.com/nuttx> > >> > > <http://github.com/nuttx> > >> > > > <http://github.com/nuttx> > >> > > > > > <http://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` > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > > > <http://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty> > >> > > > > > <http://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 > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >
