Hi Tomek, I think we could solve all these Tiers issues (no pun intended) just by keeping the HALs at github.com/NuttX because: 1) It is still under our control; 2) Vendors don't need to mess with HAL SGA or conversion to Apache; 3) We avoid the supply chain issue because only PMC/Committers have write access there.
Anyway, if Tiago/Espressif thinks moving it to ASF is better, let's move it. Let's fix this issue because as you said, users are waiting... BR, Alan On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 3:10 PM Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> wrote: > Alan, what Tiago means is that right now right here we are solving > problem specific to Espressif. I agree with that. How other vendors > implement their drivers is up to them. Project is under ASF, so the > solution also should be under ASF. In a perfect situation we want NO > HAL but in-tree drivers to stay independent. But when HAL is > unavoidable we could have Tier 2 and Tier 3, as mentioned before: > > Tier 1 - in tree code drivers. > Tier 2 - HAL that is under ASF and our control. <-- this esp-hal scenario. > Tier 3 - HAL that is external and out of our control (not rally welcome). > > I can see several benefits of this situation summed up in my previous > replies to this thread, which can be summed shortly like "we are > moving ESP-HAL from Tier 3 to Tier 2", although we yet have no > official tiers defined or even agreed, these are practical steps to > fix most issues reported by Felipe. > > Yes, if ever any other hal is introduced (yuck!), it may be in Tier 2 > or Tier 3. When in Tier 3 it will be in different locations anyway > because vendors most likely prefer to keep their HALs under their own > umbrella, you will have zero control over that code its api location > licensing quality releases etc - this is exactly what we want to avoid > and this is exactly why Tier 2 is being proposed right now in this > particular vote :-) > > -- > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 2:53 PM Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi Tiago, > > > > Thank is not the point: "ASF has nothing to do with adopting other > vendors' > > HAL or not." > > > > If we move Espressif HAL to ASF Infra but cannot move other HALs there, > we > > immediately create a problem: we will spread HALs across different > > locations. > > > > BR, > > > > Alan > > > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 10:51 AM Tiago Medicci Serrano < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 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> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > <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> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > <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> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > <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> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > <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> > > >> > > > >> > > > > > <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 > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >
