Hello Laczen,

This is not true: "... maintainers: make a fork and take over maintenance,
have AI rewrite it, ..."

I volunteered to do a Proof of Concept (PoC) myself, and I'm always talking
about willingness; nobody said it's anyone specific's responsibility to do
it.

Em sex., 7 de ago. de 2026 às 15:31, Laczen JMS <[email protected]>
escreveu:

> Hi Alan,
>
> All I stated was that the discussion was disrespectful to espressif
> maintainers: make a fork and take over maintenance, have AI rewrite it, ...
>
> I agree that NuttX is probably not getting the same attention as zephyr
> from espressif. Just accept this.
>
> The NuttX support from espressif is among the best of any hardware
> provider.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jehudi
>
> On Fri, Aug 7, 2026, 18:32 Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jehudi,
> >
> > First of all, I'm not disrespectful to Espressif or any contributor from
> > there.
> >
> > So, when you are saying that I was not respectful to Espressif you have
> > been disrespectful to me!
> >
> > As I said before, Espressif deserves all our respect and consideration
> > because they are one of few companies to contribute to the NuttX.
> >
> > But you need to understand the employees from Espressif are not full time
> > dedicated to support NuttX, they have other priorities and it is fine.
> >
> > If Espressif doesn't have many companies using NuttX with their chips
> they
> > are free to relocate these employees to work in other projects.
> >
> > And in fact one of the reasons that I decided to leave Espressif was
> > because they could relocate to work on Zephyr or other project that I was
> > not interested in.
> >
> > The esp-hal-3rdparty is used only by NuttX, it is not used by Zephyr or
> any
> > other project, and as you can see it not maintained the same way as
> Zephyr
> > HAL.
> >
> > And I think now you touched on an important point: "they both start from
> > esp-idf and then patches are applied", that is the idea our contributors
> > can help to do it and avoid waiting a long time for a simple fix.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 1:09 PM Laczen JMS <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Alan,
> > >
> > > Why should this be under NuttX, what is the difference whether the code
> > is
> > > under NuttX or under espressif. The maintainers would be the same. The
> > > espressif_hal under zephyr is not maintained by zephyr maintainers, it
> is
> > > maintained by espressif. The same is valid for other hals, they are
> > > maintained by the companies that provide the hardware.
> > >
> > > This whole discussion has been disrespectful for the maintainers from
> > > espressif, and the reason for bringing it up questionable (and was
> taken
> > > care of by espressif). Was this proposed PR even required, was it the
> > best
> > > solution, ... questions that are left unanswered.
> > >
> > > Regarding how the hal is created, as far as I know they both start from
> > > esp-idf and then patches are applied. When a major release of esp-idf
> is
> > > done a major sync appears. I think this is a good method. Whenever
> > changes
> > > are proposed to the hal this method needs to be taken into
> consideration,
> > > preferably change a patch and not code. This is the only way we can be
> > sure
> > > to have fast support for new devices. The same is true for the hal used
> > in
> > > zephyr, although I think that there they are going to see a blowup in
> > > maintenance because they are changing code instead of patches.
> > >
> > > IMHO the best is to leave as is, give a gentle reminder when something
> is
> > > stuck.
> > >
> > > Kind regards,
> > >
> > > Jehudi
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026, 17:37 Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Matteo,
> > > >
> > > > Exactly, that is what I was saying. They can contribute directly to a
> > HAL
> > > > inside GitHub/NuttX.
> > > >
> > > > There are already contributors outside Espressif with great knowledge
> > > about
> > > > their chips, they could contribute to this HAL without waiting days
> or
> > > > months to get it on the HAL.
> > > >
> > > > I think Felipe Moura already found and fixed many issues himself, so
> it
> > > > shows that we have users willing to help.
> > > >
> > > > BR,
> > > >
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 11:58 AM Matteo Golin <[email protected]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > 1) Espressif always said it would conform to community rules;
> > hence,
> > > > why
> > > > > we
> > > > > > have been absent. The community must decide first, and then we
> can
> > > see
> > > > > > whether the contribution is feasible.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think Espressif has at least done very well in engaging with the
> > > > > community. As
> > > > > I mentioned, you are responsive to raised issues even if recently
> > there
> > > > > have
> > > > > been other things taking your time instead of patching them.
> > > > >
> > > > > > 2) We do not block contributions, and we never saw ourselves as
> > > > 'owning'
> > > > > > Espressif support in NuttX. We do have opinions, and we do try to
> > > > > optimize,
> > > > > > and we do listen to others. We actually expect more people
> willing
> > to
> > > > > help.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you, Tiago! I wouldn't say you 'own' it, but you are in our
> > > > > CODEOWNERS for
> > > > > all the Espressif devices because your reviews and understanding
> are
> > > > > invaluable
> > > > > for us merging patches. I think that you guys have done an
> excellent
> > > job
> > > > > with
> > > > > it, I don't think I've ever had to request changes on patches from
> > the
> > > > > Espressif
> > > > > team.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Espressif already maintains the HAL of Zephyr (inside Zephyr
> repo),
> > > > which
> > > > > > is completely different from that esp-hal used by NuttX.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alan, I had no idea! I thought the Zephyr HAL was also built on top
> > the
> > > > > same ESP
> > > > > HAL we're using. If this is true, then maybe with Tiago's internal
> > > > > escalation
> > > > > Espressif might be willing to help us maintain our own HAL?
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Matteo
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I won't justify HAL, pros, cons, and such. I escalated this
> > > internally,
> > > > > and
> > > > > > I have some answers:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1) Espressif always said it would conform to community rules;
> > hence,
> > > > why
> > > > > we
> > > > > > have been absent. The community must decide first, and then we
> can
> > > see
> > > > > > whether the contribution is feasible.
> > > > > > 2) We do not block contributions, and we never saw ourselves as
> > > > 'owning'
> > > > > > Espressif support in NuttX. We do have opinions, and we do try to
> > > > > optimize,
> > > > > > and we do listen to others. We actually expect more people
> willing
> > to
> > > > > help.
> > > > > > 3) So far, the discussed options were:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >    - Total AI rewrite (I assume at the register level).
> > > > > >    - Fork, taking it from there - maybe going Zephyr style.
> > > > > >    - Replacing HAL slowly, piece by piece.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Tiago
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Em sex., 7 de ago. de 2026 às 09:27, Alan C. Assis <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > escreveu:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Matteo,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think you summarized it very well.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Tomek, Nathan and Alin, I think you are missing an important
> > point:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/hal_espressif
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Espressif already maintains the HAL of Zephyr (inside Zephyr
> > repo),
> > > > > which
> > > > > > > is completely different from that esp-hal used by NuttX.
> > > > > > > You can see it by looking at the history, they submit commits
> > > mostly
> > > > > > > daily, including PR from esp-hal maintainer that are there but
> > are
> > > > not
> > > > > in
> > > > > > > ESP-HAL repo.
> > > > > > > The only reason that esp-hal exists is because we (including
> /me
> > as
> > > > > > > Espressifer at that time) knew that NuttX was not open to
> using a
> > > HAL
> > > > > like
> > > > > > > Zephyr was doing and will not create a esp-hal for us.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It could sound ironic, but maybe it makes more sense for NuttX
> to
> > > use
> > > > > > > Zephyr HAL directly, at least we know they are taking care of
> it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > BR,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alan
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 4:28 PM Matteo Golin <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> These are all true points. I also think the decision about the
> > ESP
> > > > > HAL was
> > > > > > >> made before my time, so I wouldn't know if there was a vote or
> > > not.
> > > > > That
> > > > > > >> shouldn't stop us from conducting proper votes going forward,
> > > > though.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> For the record, I'm on-board with the fork that we can submit
> > > > patches
> > > > > to.
> > > > > > >> This is actually a similar approach my rocketry team takes
> with
> > > > NuttX;
> > > > > > >> they
> > > > > > >> have a custom fork to get their own driver stuff in so they
> can
> > > > > continue
> > > > > > >> development, and then submit the drivers upstream when they
> are
> > > > ready
> > > > > to
> > > > > > >> go
> > > > > > >> through the re-formatting/review process to make them better.
> I
> > am
> > > > > pretty
> > > > > > >> certain Xiaomi also does this, and of course PX4 is similar.
> It
> > > > seems
> > > > > like
> > > > > > >> a fork is a good idea for us here, because it's a buffering
> > point
> > > > for
> > > > > us
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> get the benefits of our patches before they get up-streamed to
> > > > > Espressif,
> > > > > > >> if ever.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Laczen is right that we would need to figure out where to host
> > the
> > > > > fork
> > > > > > >> and
> > > > > > >> who will maintain the fork (i.e. do we even both spending CI
> > > > > resources on
> > > > > > >> it or just continue with the NuttX CI and take up-stream
> > backports
> > > > at
> > > > > face
> > > > > > >> value with the expectation that Espressif CI has tested them).
> > In
> > > > > terms of
> > > > > > >> formatting, I think we should keep whatever formatting method
> > > > > Espressif
> > > > > > >> has. If it's a fork external to the kernel then there is no
> need
> > > to
> > > > > comply
> > > > > > >> with the NuttX style guide for now, since re-formatting would
> > make
> > > > > > >> back-porting changes a nightmare. If we ever transition to
> > > replacing
> > > > > parts
> > > > > > >> of the HAL within our own kernel tree, then we can format
> > > according
> > > > > to the
> > > > > > >> style guide.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > > >> Matteo
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 3:02 PM Alan C. Assis <
> [email protected]
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Hi Laczen,
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > That was what I asked in some previous emails, but it seems
> > like
> > > > > they
> > > > > > >> are
> > > > > > >> > not looking at our mailing list, so I'm copying Tiago (the
> > repo
> > > > > > >> > maintainer).
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > As he already explained in the issue from June, he is very
> > busy
> > > > with
> > > > > > >> other
> > > > > > >> > high-priorities duties at Espressif.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Tiago, if you had time to read this discussion, please let
> me
> > > know
> > > > > > >> whether
> > > > > > >> > it is fine for you to submit a contribution to our HAL fork?
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > We understand that Espressif has its own agenda and maybe
> > NuttX
> > > is
> > > > > not a
> > > > > > >> > priority, but I believe that an open-source project should
> > have
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> right
> > > > > > >> > to move on without being blocked by that same agenda.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > BR,
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Alan
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 3:48 PM Laczen JMS <
> > [email protected]>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > I don't think it is a good idea to quickly create a fork.
> > > When a
> > > > > fork
> > > > > > >> > > is created some expectations need to be clear:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > 1. Who will maintain it and ensure that new devices are
> > added,
> > > > > > >> > > 2. What are the rules this fork should comply with (e.g.
> > code
> > > > > > >> > formatting),
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Why not first set the rules (if any), and if there are no
> > (if
> > > we
> > > > > agree
> > > > > > >> > > so) ask the current maintainers of esp_hal_3rdparty if
> they
> > > > would
> > > > > also
> > > > > > >> > > do it under nuttx (cfg zephyr).
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > BR,
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Jehudi
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > Op do 6 aug 2026 om 20:02 schreef Felipe Moura Oliveira <
> > > > > > >> > > [email protected]>:
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > Unfortunately, I was not here when the dependency on
> > > > Espressif's
> > > > > > >> > > 3rd-party
> > > > > > >> > > > repository was added. I tracked it down, and it was
> > > introduced
> > > > > in
> > > > > > >> PR:
> > > > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/8816.
> > > > > > >> > > > File:
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://github.com/apache/nuttx/blob/17f7f6e86d9c045df53c65213d0c83487746d61d/arch/risc-v/src/espressif/Make.defs#L40-L59
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > At that time, I was not on this mailing list. Could
> > someone
> > > > from
> > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > >> > > > period check if a formal vote was held regarding the
> > > adoption
> > > > > of a
> > > > > > >> > kernel
> > > > > > >> > > > dependency on an external repository?
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > If no vote was conducted back then, creating a fork of
> the
> > > > > 3rd-party
> > > > > > >> > > > repository and bringing it under the NuttX organization
> > will
> > > > > correct
> > > > > > >> > this
> > > > > > >> > > > point.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > Em qui., 6 de ago. de 2026 às 14:43, Matteo Golin <
> > > > > > >> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > escreveu:
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > I believe it would still be a code change, since our
> > fork
> > > > will
> > > > > > >> > diverge
> > > > > > >> > > and
> > > > > > >> > > > > it will also presumably be used instead of the ESP HAL
> > in
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> kernel
> > > > > > >> > at
> > > > > > >> > > > > some point. I just think the vote would be useful in
> > case
> > > > > people
> > > > > > >> > > disagree
> > > > > > >> > > > > with the fork approach. It also a rather major change.
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Best,
> > > > > > >> > > > > Matteo
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026, 1:35 p.m. Felipe Moura Oliveira <
> > > > > > >> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Since creating a fork of a repository and initially
> > > using
> > > > it
> > > > > > >> > "as-is"
> > > > > > >> > > does
> > > > > > >> > > > > > not involve any actual code modifications, would a
> > > formal
> > > > > vote
> > > > > > >> ? In
> > > > > > >> > > other
> > > > > > >> > > > > > words, we aren’t change any code.
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira*
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Linkedin <
> > > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0>
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Thu, 6 Aug 2026 at 13:09 Gregory Nutt <
> > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Apache votig rules for code changes work
> > differently.
> > > > See
> > > > > > >> Votes
> > > > > > >> > on
> > > > > > >> > > > > code
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > modification
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > in https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html
> > > > > Basically
> > > > > > >> all
> > > > > > >> > > voting
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > members have a veto right and can stop any code
> > > change.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > So, it is important to get concurrence before the
> > vote
> > > > > or, at
> > > > > > >> > > least,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > assure that no one is dramatically opposed to any
> > code
> > > > > change.
> > > > > > >> > > This is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > where you get to use you people skills and power
> of
> > > > > > >> persuasion.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > ________________________________
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > From: Matteo Golin <[email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, August 6, 2026 8:51 AM
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > To: [email protected] <[email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Subject: Re: Discussing the governance of NuttX’s
> > > > > > >> > esp-hal-3rdparty
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > dependency
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hold on Alan, I think we should have a vote on
> it. I
> > > > also
> > > > > > >> think
> > > > > > >> > it
> > > > > > >> > > > > needs
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > some more discussion to decide on a way to
> approach
> > > > > making the
> > > > > > >> > new
> > > > > > >> > > HAL
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > since there seems to be some opposing views about
> > > > forking,
> > > > > > >> > making a
> > > > > > >> > > > > > custom
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > one, etc.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > It hasn't been very long since we opened this
> > thread,
> > > > > maybe we
> > > > > > >> > can
> > > > > > >> > > > > reach
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > out to our Espressif contributors directly to ask
> > them
> > > > for
> > > > > > >> > comment
> > > > > > >> > > in
> > > > > > >> > > > > > case
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > they did not monitor this thread.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Matteo
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 6, 2026 at 11:02 AM Alan C. Assis <
> > > > > > >> [email protected]
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Ok, since we didn't hear from Espressif
> > contributors
> > > > and
> > > > > > >> > > everybody
> > > > > > >> > > > > > agreed
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > it is better to have a HAL under NuttX than
> under
> > an
> > > > > > >> external
> > > > > > >> > > > > company,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > let's create it.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > BR,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Alan
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 2:48 PM Alan C. Assis <
> > > > > > >> > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Yes, I agree we need a common agreement to
> > > implement
> > > > > such
> > > > > > >> > > > > > modification.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > And today we are more divided about AI usage.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > But I agree we are discussing two or three
> > > separated
> > > > > > >> things.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Let's return to the main issue. First we need
> to
> > > > know
> > > > > if
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > Espressif
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > contributors agree to contribute to a esp-hal
> > > hosted
> > > > > on
> > > > > > >> NuttX
> > > > > > >> > > side.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > BR,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Alan
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, August 5, 2026, Matteo Golin <
> > > > > > >> > > [email protected]
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >  I disagree with the suggestion that those
> > > > > interested
> > > > > > >> in
> > > > > > >> > > > > exploring
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> path should just create a separate
> experimental
> > > > > project.
> > > > > > >> In
> > > > > > >> > an
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > open-source
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> community, every contribution and idea is
> > > valuable,
> > > > > even
> > > > > > >> if
> > > > > > >> > it
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > introduces
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> disagreement or ultimately fails.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Yes, in spirit. This is why the idea is being
> > > > > discussed
> > > > > > >> > here.
> > > > > > >> > > But
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> ultimately, without consensus, we can't just
> > have
> > > > > > >> everyone's
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > experimental
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> ideas merged into NuttX to succeed/fail
> there.
> > > That
> > > > > is
> > > > > > >> why
> > > > > > >> > we
> > > > > > >> > > are
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> discussing it first. NuttX mainline is not a
> > > > > playground
> > > > > > >> for
> > > > > > >> > > > > > anything,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> that's why we take pains to ask for testing
> > logs
> > > > and
> > > > > get
> > > > > > >> > > proper PR
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> descriptions.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> The ESP HAL is used in many devices. One such
> > > > device
> > > > > is
> > > > > > >> my
> > > > > > >> > > ESP32
> > > > > > >> > > > > > based
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> rocket altimeter. This altimer is responsible
> > for
> > > > > > >> deploying
> > > > > > >> > > > > > parachutes
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> my very expensive rocket. If that goes wrong,
> > my
> > > > > rocket
> > > > > > >> > > crashes
> > > > > > >> > > > > and
> > > > > > >> > > > > > I
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > lose
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> a lot of money and time. I don't want to rely
> > on
> > > an
> > > > > > >> > > experimental,
> > > > > > >> > > > > AI
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> written HAL for this. I much prefer the
> > iterated,
> > > > > > >> strictly
> > > > > > >> > > tested
> > > > > > >> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> maintained HAL by the company itself. A NuttX
> > > > > written HAL
> > > > > > >> > > would
> > > > > > >> > > > > need
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> well tested, understood and maintained for me
> > to
> > > > > want to
> > > > > > >> > make
> > > > > > >> > > the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > switch.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> These changes have real consequences, and for
> > > > > companies
> > > > > > >> much
> > > > > > >> > > > > larger
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > than
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> just lowly old me and my hobby rockets.
> Keeping
> > > > > > >> guarantees
> > > > > > >> > for
> > > > > > >> > > > > users
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> utmost concern and we always need to weigh
> that
> > > > when
> > > > > > >> > > considering
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > options.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> We are unfortunately not free to just
> > experiment
> > > > with
> > > > > > >> > > anything in
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > mainline
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> when we'd like.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Matteo
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, 12:52 p.m. Matteo Golin
> <
> > > > > > >> > > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > What Raiden mentioned is right: AI
> generated
> > or
> > > > > not,
> > > > > > >> this
> > > > > > >> > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > something
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> we
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > have to discuss with the Espressif
> > maintainers.
> > > > > They
> > > > > > >> are
> > > > > > >> > > > > > incredibly
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> active
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > and keep our ESP support up to date. As
> much
> > > as I
> > > > > want
> > > > > > >> our
> > > > > > >> > > own
> > > > > > >> > > > > > NuttX
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> HAL,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > we have to decide if it's worth trading for
> > the
> > > > > burden
> > > > > > >> of
> > > > > > >> > > having
> > > > > > >> > > > > > our
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> own,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > non-Espressif maintainers for it. I'm
> > > incredibly
> > > > > > >> against
> > > > > > >> > > the AI
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > rewrite,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > but at this time I would also be against a
> > > > by-hand
> > > > > > >> rewrite
> > > > > > >> > > > > unless
> > > > > > >> > > > > > we
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > somehow get continued support maintaining
> it,
> > > > > either by
> > > > > > >> > > > > Espressif
> > > > > > >> > > > > > or
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> other
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > devs, at the level we get from Espressif
> > right
> > > > now.
> > > > > > >> That
> > > > > > >> > > kind of
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> maintainer
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > work is super valuable to NuttX, which
> > already
> > > > has
> > > > > few
> > > > > > >> > > > > > maintainers.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Also, respectfully, thinking that a new HAL
> > > > > rewritten
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> > > follow
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > NuttX
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > idioms will have bit-by-bit identical
> output
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > >> > > original ESP
> > > > > > >> > > > > > HAL
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > wishful thinking. All kinds of things,
> > > including
> > > > > > >> internal
> > > > > > >> > > data
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> structures,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > will be different. Unless I am
> > misunderstanding
> > > > > that
> > > > > > >> > > > > proposition,
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > definitely not going to work as a testing
> > plan
> > > > for
> > > > > a
> > > > > > >> new
> > > > > > >> > > HAL.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Matteo
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, 12:44 p.m. Tomek
> CEDRO <
> > > > > > >> > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 4:27 PM Marco C. <
> > > > > > >> > > > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> > Let me try to explain the methodology so
> > you
> > > > can
> > > > > > >> open
> > > > > > >> > > your
> > > > > > >> > > > > > mind:
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> > (..)
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> > Open your mind. Peace.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> > Marco Casaroli
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> We are open-minded Marco, very, it is
> highly
> > > > > unfair to
> > > > > > >> > say
> > > > > > >> > > we
> > > > > > >> > > > > are
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > not.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> You need to take into a consideration that
> > all
> > > > > NuttX
> > > > > > >> > > related
> > > > > > >> > > > > work
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> done in our free time at the expense of
> any
> > > > other
> > > > > > >> tasks
> > > > > > >> > > > > sometimes
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > our
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> families and so called private human life.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> We are also people taking personal
> > > > responsibility
> > > > > for
> > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > products
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> development, its delivery, and
> maintenance.
> > If
> > > > > things
> > > > > > >> > take
> > > > > > >> > > too
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > complex
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> and too long to deliver we are out of
> > > business.
> > > > If
> > > > > > >> things
> > > > > > >> > > fail
> > > > > > >> > > > > on
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> production we are out of business. If we
> are
> > > > > unable to
> > > > > > >> > > maintain
> > > > > > >> > > > > > and
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> service products we are out of business.
> > This
> > > > out
> > > > > of
> > > > > > >> > > business
> > > > > > >> > > > > > also
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> means measurable financial responsibility.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> Most of us are owners of the company,
> > > business,
> > > > > > >> product.
> > > > > > >> > We
> > > > > > >> > > > > have
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> experiences that made us have solid stand
> on
> > > the
> > > > > > >> ground
> > > > > > >> > and
> > > > > > >> > > > > think
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> way we think. Its okay to play around and
> > > > > experiment,
> > > > > > >> but
> > > > > > >> > > its
> > > > > > >> > > > > not
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > okay
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> to impose experiments on everyone around,
> > like
> > > > so
> > > > > > >> called
> > > > > > >> > > modern
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > world
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> does right now. We cannot build without
> > solid
> > > > > > >> > foundations,
> > > > > > >> > > when
> > > > > > >> > > > > > all
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> components change all the time, including
> > > > > software and
> > > > > > >> > > recently
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > even
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> hardware components. Its a big complex
> mess
> > > > right
> > > > > > >> now. We
> > > > > > >> > > do
> > > > > > >> > > > > not
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > want
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> to make it worse or even take part
> > ourselves.
> > > > > This is
> > > > > > >> > > clearly
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> destructive.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> We can play around but then we need to
> > provide
> > > > > > >> > alternative
> > > > > > >> > > path
> > > > > > >> > > > > > to
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> selected, while foundations must remain
> rock
> > > > > solid, so
> > > > > > >> > > people
> > > > > > >> > > > > > have
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> choice. I understand you use free AI to
> > create
> > > > > stuff,
> > > > > > >> but
> > > > > > >> > > in
> > > > > > >> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > end
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> there are living humans paying bills daily
> > > that
> > > > > need
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> > > process
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> also for free in their free time.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> My proposition for the people with lots of
> > > free
> > > > > time
> > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > >> > to
> > > > > > >> > > > > create
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > an
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> experimental but separate AI NuttX rewrite
> > and
> > > > see
> > > > > > >> how it
> > > > > > >> > > goes.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > It
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> should be a win-win scenario where we can
> > cope
> > > > > with
> > > > > > >> basic
> > > > > > >> > > tasks
> > > > > > >> > > > > > in
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> NuttX while the other project may explore
> > new
> > > > > worlds.
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> Peace :-)
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> --
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >> CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ,
> > http://www.tomek.cedro.info
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > --
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira*
> > > > > > >> > > > Linkedin <
> > > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0>
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matteo Golin
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 

*--Felipe Moura de Oliveira*
Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0>

Reply via email to