Hi all, Just to address some concerns:
Tomek, a veto is valid for *code modifications.* No code is being modified here. In this case, the best fit for this vote is a *procedural issue *(we are moving a piece of code to ASF). That's why simple majority applies and I declared it as *passed* (I wasn't "pushing" for that, I based it on https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting). Alan, respectfully, all the concerns you raised are not related to this vote. ASF has nothing to do with adopting other vendors' HAL or not. This is a decision for the projects ASF hosts (and, of course, if they fulfil ASF requirements). The same for HAL becoming (or not) a standard on NuttX: nothing prevents native development. We voted for hosting Espressif's HAL under ASF (and only that). Best regards, Em qua., 7 de out. de 2026 às 10:36, Karel Kočí <[email protected]> escreveu: > Hi, > > I want to support Alan here. I would prefer the ESP HAL integration, when > it is > donated anyway, over HAL standardization. On this I like the Alan's > approach > more. I only feel like we might be minority. > > I am not against vendor HALs out right, I just think that they should be > "secondary" support and that they should not be part of the core. Vendors > having > option either doing the right thing and donating the code, or doing the > cheap > thing and just integrating with NuttX through their existing HAL. > > I am advocating for ESP integration and addition of support for external > chips. > > Karel > > On Wed 07 Oct 2026 10:26:30 AM , Alan C. Assis wrote: > > Hi Tomek and Tiago, > > > > Right, I can change my vote to +1 to let it pass. > > > > Although I think we are doing the wrong thing. It should have been done > in > > the right order. > > > > First we need to confirm with ASF if they will accept hosting any HAL > even > > from vendors who do not want to give a SGA to Apache. > > > > And maybe even more importantly: shouldn't we vote first on whether to > > accept HAL as a standard? > > > > It seems many here oppose making HAL a standard to avoid the issue other > > RTOSs face with poor-quality HALs. > > > > We can move the Espressif HAL to the Apache repository and over time, we > > can fix NuttX to replace it with native code. I think this is the safer > > option. > > > > BR, > > > > Alan > > > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 10:13 AM Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 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> > > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > >> > > > <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 > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
