Hi Tomek, That is true! But even contributors who are not actively contributing can vote.
We can propose removing committers and PMCs who are not involved in the project (ASF allows this; we need to notify them). However, I think it would be better to create an ex-PMCs/Committers page to keep the history, because all contributors helped improve NuttX at some point (we cannot ignore their legacy). Currently we have about 34 PMCs/Committers: https://nuttx.apache.org/community-members/ but only about 10% or 15% are still actively contributing. This is just a suggestion to reflect the current reality. BR, Alan On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 4:09 PM Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> wrote: > Felipe this is our current active core team, look at the release > testing, look how many people review PRs, this is why I initially > opposed forking esp-hal and handling it ourselves because we would not > handle it, all this work is done for free in our free time at the > expense of other tasks and activities. > > With current proposition all issues that you reported seem to be > fixed, we would be part of handling PRs, code it under NuttX / ASF > umbrella, but we still have active support of the vendor development > team, this this seems the best possible solution. At first you wanted > exactly this now you seem to oppose it, why?? > > One problem I can see here is when NuttX some day wants to abandon > ASF, or ESP wants to get back the HAL, that would not be possible. > Only then code outside ASF would have no ties.. but for sure it will > have other (vendor) ties.. that still may not be as easy to break as > forking the ASF project? Is this the risk I was missing? > > I really love NuttX community because everyone have different > perspectives and experiences that create this unique solutions like we > are trying right now.. that were not even obvious when we highlighted > the problem and started the discussion :-) > > -- > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info > > On Wed, Oct 7, 2026 at 6:50 PM Felipe Moura Oliveira > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > The voter turnout for this decision seems very low. Since this is an > > important topic, wouldn't it be appropriate to send a broader call for > > votes to stimulate more committee members? > > > > > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira* > > Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0> > > > > On Wed, 7 Oct 2026 at 15:31 Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > 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> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > <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> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > <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 > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
