Hi all, As I mentioned, I believe I have been clear enough. However, considering this a losing battle, I am dropping the topic.
Best regards, Felipe Moura de Oliveira Em dom., 23 de ago. de 2026 às 16:53, Matteo Golin <[email protected]> escreveu: > I also am not entirely clear what we are voting for. Felipe, if you want to > have a community vote, please start a new thread with "[VOTE]" in the > subject line and clearly outline what a vote of +1 would be in favour of. > That way it's not buried in this separate "[DISCUSS]" thread. We can vote > there, which is the standard way NuttX conducts voting :) > > Matteo > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2026, 4:29 p.m. Tomek CEDRO <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Felipe, questions asked by Tiago are valid questions, which try to > > underline issues that NuttX development team will face. All these > > points will have to be processed by someone, take responsibility, and > > maintain in the long term. > > > > From my perspective current situation is optimal: NuttX does neither > > support nor maintain external SDKs, Espressif here is an exception > > because we have solid support from vendor, Espressif developers are > > also members of the NuttX development team. > > > > What you propose is tremendous amount of additional work, and > > responsibilities, for a small team of volunteers. My feeling is that > > big vendor can handle this better, and in fact we always have very > > good support from Espressif in any case of code, issues, testing, > > reviews, etc. > > > > There is some resistance here, because people did cost-benefit > > analysis, and they may not be able to handle yet another batch of > > additional work. > > > > Can we try to improve things with current setup? > > > > What is the exact problem we want to solve here? Delayed reviews? If > > so maybe someone from NuttX could get write access to esp-sdk repo and > > help in reviews? > > > > -- > > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info > > > > -- > > CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 8:00 PM Felipe Moura Oliveira > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Tiago, > > > > > > This thread has grown to nearly 100 emails, and the topic has been > > thoroughly discussed. > > > > > > I will not ask you to go back and reread everything, as I understand > you > > must be very busy, as you said, you're a PMC member. There are currently > > several open issues requesting ESP support, and you have frequently > > mentioned that your other priorities prevent you from looking into them. > > > > > > Thank you to everyone who participated in this discussion. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > Em qui., 20 de ago. de 2026 às 16:40, Tiago Medicci Serrano < > > [email protected]> escreveu: > > >> > > >> Hi all, > > >> > > >> Thanks for the input, Felipe. However, what should we (the NuttX > > community) vote for? This isn't clear to me... > > >> > > >> In my humble opinion (talking as a PMC member), we should better > define > > what we would expect by hosting HAL repositories under the Apache NuttX > > umbrella. > > >> > > >> - Does it mean NuttX is officially supporting 3rd-party HALs like > > Zephyr? > > >> - Who are the maintainers of the repository? > > >> - Which other repositories would be forked, considering externally > > provided sources used in NuttX (kernel)? > > >> - What are (and who defines) the rules for the forked repositories? > > >> - Are there any licensing restrictions? > > >> - What about CI usage to test automated sync? > > >> - Where should such policies be documented? > > >> - Are there any other questions to be asked/answered? > > >> > > >> Those (and potentially other) questions should be properly answered > (at > > least as a plan) before we move forward towards a voting session. > > >> > > >> Best regards, > > >> > > >> > > >> Em qui., 20 de ago. de 2026 às 16:22, Felipe Moura Oliveira < > > [email protected]> escreveu: > > >>> > > >>> Hi all, > > >>> > > >>> I believe it is valid and mature to open the vote at this stage. > > >>> > > >>> The topic has been thoroughly discussed, and regardless of the > > outcome, it is important to bring this discussion to a conclusion, both > for > > the record and to allow the project to move forward. > > >>> > > >>> Best regards, > > >>> Felipe Moura de Oliveira > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Em qui., 20 de ago. de 2026 às 15:58, Tiago Medicci Serrano < > > [email protected]> escreveu: > > >>>> > > >>>> Hi all, > > >>>> > > >>>> Regarding the latest messages in this conversation, there is > > something we'd like to highlight about how `esp-hal-3rdparty` is actually > > used (and maintained): as mentioned in its description at > > https://github.com/espressif/esp-hal-3rdparty/, it contains both sync > and > > release branches. The sync branch is automatically derived from ESP-IDF's > > sources (`components` folders). On top of that, the release branch is the > > branch that NuttX actually uses. It contains changes on top of > `components` > > folder and the adapter layer for NuttX. > > >>>> > > >>>> We expect that HAL will need less and less changes from its sources > > (especially directly in the `components` folder), which means that > > contributions will be far apart (they already are) and even less > frequent. > > That being said, the way HAL is treated would have to be kept exactly the > > same to keep the ability to sync with upstream. The moment any commit > > breaks this is the moment contribution is no longer feasible. So, while > > technically anyone in the community could do anything, they would have to > > do it in the same way it is done today. > > >>>> > > >>>> Additionally, it's worth mentioning that this is how it is done in > > Zephyr. Espressif team constantly checks whether commits don't break the > > ability to sync and gather the latest changes from ESP-IDF, which enables > > us to support newer SoCs faster and promptly handle bug fixes related to > > the low level. > > >>>> > > >>>> Best regards, > > >>>> > > >>>> Em sáb., 15 de ago. de 2026 às 16:39, Alan C. Assis < > > [email protected]> escreveu: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Just an example here: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The ESP32-S31 is done by someone from the community. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> We could add it or wait 6 months from getting it (ESP32-P4 delay > > more than 2 year, and still not complete yet) > > >>>>> > > >>>>> BR, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Alan > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> On Sat, Aug 15, 2026 at 12:16 PM Felipe Moura Oliveira < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Hi Jehudi, > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Here are my thoughts on the questions you raised: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 1. What are the advantages and consequences of changing the > > location? > > >>>>>> It will allow people with write access to NuttX to review and > > approve > > >>>>>> PRs, removing the pressure from a few individuals and the vendor's > > internal > > >>>>>> queue. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 2. What is the goal of changing the location: closer to NuttX and > > it's > > >>>>>> style? > > >>>>>> In addition to the point above, the goal is to prevent NuttX > > from > > >>>>>> becoming increasingly dependent on external agents, especially > > vendors. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 3. Who will be responsible? > > >>>>>> The community, meaning anyone who is interested in > contributing. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 4. Who will write the code? > > >>>>>> The community, meaning anyone who is interested in > contributing. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 5. Who will maintain the code? > > >>>>>> The community, meaning anyone who is interested in > contributing. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> 6. Who will ensure that newer devices are supported? > > >>>>>> The community, meaning anyone who is interested in > contributing. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Best regards, > > >>>>>> Felipe Moura de Oliveira > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Em sex., 14 de ago. de 2026 às 12:44, Laczen JMS < > > [email protected]> > > >>>>>> escreveu: > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > Hi Felipe, > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > Hosting the repository like zephyr style would just mean moving > it > > >>>>>> > under nuttx but leaving the merge rights to people from > espressif. > > >>>>>> > They understand how this repository is updated and what the work > > is > > >>>>>> > when changes are applied. I wouldn't mind this at all, but I > > don't see > > >>>>>> > any advantages. In zephyr the repo is there to ensure that > > whatever > > >>>>>> > version of zephyr is checked-out it has the correct library, in > > NuttX > > >>>>>> > this is achieved in a different way with less work by updating > the > > >>>>>> > commit-sha of the repository. > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > Please read the statement from espressif carefully: when the > > comunity > > >>>>>> > would decide (according to community rules) that the > > esp_hal_3rdparty > > >>>>>> > is to be moved under nuttx (and possibly the merging rights > would > > be > > >>>>>> > changed) espressif will evaluate whether contribution is > feasible. > > >>>>>> > This could lead to the decision that contribution is no longer > > >>>>>> > feasible, leaving NuttX behind with less support. Up to now > > espressif > > >>>>>> > has reviewing and > > >>>>>> > creating PR's for NuttX because they understand how the > > interaction > > >>>>>> > with esp_hal_3rdparty is happening, expecting espressif to do > the > > same > > >>>>>> > for a library that is handled by NuttX could be wishfull > thinking. > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > I would conclude with the following questions: > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > 1. What are the advantages and consequences of changing the > > location? > > >>>>>> > 2. What is the goal of changing the location: closer to NuttX > and > > it's > > >>>>>> > style? > > >>>>>> > 3. Who will be responsible? > > >>>>>> > 4. Who will write the code? > > >>>>>> > 5. Who will maintain the code? > > >>>>>> > 6. Who will ensure that newer devices are supported? > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > If any of these questions has an unclear answer it is better too > > leave > > >>>>>> > it as is and embrace the work that espressif is doing for NuttX > > (both > > >>>>>> > in PR and publicity on their blog). > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > Kind regards, > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > Jehudi > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > Op vr 14 aug 2026 om 14:56 schreef Felipe Moura Oliveira < > > >>>>>> > [email protected]>: > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > Hi Laczen, > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > Following our last discussion, and given Espressif's statement > > that they > > >>>>>> > > will conform to community rules and are waiting for the > > community to > > >>>>>> > decide > > >>>>>> > > first, are you now more comfortable with hosting the > repository > > like > > >>>>>> > Zephyr > > >>>>>> > > style? > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > Is anyone else concerned about this? > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > Em sex., 14 de ago. de 2026 às 09:01, Tiago Medicci Serrano < > > >>>>>> > > [email protected]> escreveu: > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > Hi Felipe, > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > It may have been lost in this huge thread, but the official > > position I > > >>>>>> > have > > >>>>>> > > > is the one that I already sent to the list: > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > 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, > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > Em qua., 12 de ago. de 2026 às 08:10, Felipe Moura Oliveira > < > > >>>>>> > > > [email protected]> escreveu: > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > Hi Tiago, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > Do you have any feedback from the Espressif team regarding > > this > > >>>>>> > thread? > > >>>>>> > > > > Could you check with your team if we could maintain the > > esp-hal > > >>>>>> > under the > > >>>>>> > > > > NuttX GitHub organization? This way, we would be able to > > add more > > >>>>>> > > > reviewers > > >>>>>> > > > > to help with the process. > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > Best, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > Em sáb., 8 de ago. de 2026 às 08:33, Alan C. Assis < > > >>>>>> > [email protected]> > > >>>>>> > > > > escreveu: > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > Exactly! > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > And for Zephyr the HAL for ESP32 chips already existed > > before > > >>>>>> > Espressif > > >>>>>> > > > > > started contributing to it. > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > NuttX also had a native port before Espressif started > > contributing. > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > When ESP32 chip was created, some engineers from > > Espressif was > > >>>>>> > willing > > >>>>>> > > > to > > >>>>>> > > > > > use NuttX instead of FreeRTOS and sent some boards to > > Greg. He did > > >>>>>> > the > > >>>>>> > > > > > basic port, but because their internal FreeRTOS port was > > more > > >>>>>> > advanced, > > >>>>>> > > > > > they decided to keep using it. > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > BR, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > Alan > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > On Saturday, August 8, 2026, Laczen JMS < > > [email protected]> > > >>>>>> > wrote: > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > Hi Felipe, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > Indeed, just like your PR was committed (merged) into > > >>>>>> > > > esphal_3rdparty. > > >>>>>> > > > > > The > > >>>>>> > > > > > > hal_espressif for zephyr is maintained by espressif. > > The only > > >>>>>> > > > > difference > > >>>>>> > > > > > > between NuttX and zephyr is where it is located, not > who > > >>>>>> > maintains > > >>>>>> > > > it. > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > Kind regards, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > Jehudi > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 8, 2026, 09:31 Felipe Moura Oliveira < > > >>>>>> > > > [email protected]> > > >>>>>> > > > > > > wrote: > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > Hi Laczen, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > I think you might be confusing the author with the > > committer. > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > The change was indeed committed by someone from > > Espressif who > > >>>>>> > has > > >>>>>> > > > > write > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > access to the repository, but the actual author of > > the code > > >>>>>> > was an > > >>>>>> > > > > > > external > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > contributor using a @gmail > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira* > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > Linkedin < > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0 > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > On Sat, 8 Aug 2026 at 02:31 Laczen JMS < > > [email protected]> > > >>>>>> > > > wrote: > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > Alan, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > That person is from espressif, and the commit of > > your > > >>>>>> > previous > > >>>>>> > > > > > > reference > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > was also done by someone from espressif. > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > Jehudi > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 7, 2026, 22:51 Alan C. Assis < > > [email protected]> > > >>>>>> > > > > wrote: > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > Ok, so this one the also the maintainer of > > something else > > >>>>>> > and > > >>>>>> > > > > this > > >>>>>> > > > > > is > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > why > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > is has a commit there: > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/hal_espressif/commit/ > > >>>>>> > > > > > > 34795d7847426426c618002789af2667cc262f6d > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > There are many commits from people outside > > Espressif, what > > >>>>>> > you > > >>>>>> > > > > said > > >>>>>> > > > > > > is > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > (to > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > avoid saying I'm accusing you) "not accurate". > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > BR, > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > Alan > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > -- > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira* > > >>>>>> > > > > Linkedin < > > https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0> > > >>>>>> > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > -- > > >>>>>> > > > > >>>>>> > > *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira* > > >>>>>> > > Linkedin < > https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0> > > >>>>>> > > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> -- > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira* > > >>>>>> Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> -- > > >>> -- > > >>> Felipe Moura de Oliveira > > >>> Linkedin > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > -- > > > Felipe Moura de Oliveira > > > Linkedin > > > -- *--Felipe Moura de Oliveira* Linkedin <https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0>
