I’m concerned that you are discussion doing work outside of the Apache repositories. Why is the main issue here?
I think Alan summarized this well. We are already doing work outside of the Apache repositories here: https://bitbucket.org/nuttx/?repo_name=apps-old . We have discussed this many times before. The other repositories have GPL tools that are excluded from the Apache repositories (apps/, and nuttx/ repositories there are mirrors of the Apache repositories for backward compatibility).
The discussion is then moving this from Bitbucket to https://github.com/nuttx which has only unmaintained garbage in it now and does not have any suitable project controls to be the authoritative source of anything.
Greg mentions that the apache report are not properly controlled and verified but I’m not 100% sure what he means by that. The PMC has control of them and only verified committers have access. If this is just to avoid licensing issues then I suggest that is also not the best way to deal with that and let’s discuss what those issue are and see if there are other ways of resolving them.
I am not sure what you mean by the apache report. Typo? Did you mean Apache repositories?
No, we are not discussing the Apache repositories at all other than they exclude things needed by an OS like GPL tools and LOTs of 3rd party software. Nothing was said about the apache repositories. That discussion is about the https://github.com/nuttx group of repositories and making those usable for this purpose.
I don't believe that there is anything controversial in that. What I did propose that could be controversial is that the PPMC also take control of the https://github.com/nuttx as well to provide some project framework for those other, non-Apache, non-NuttX repositories.
Greg
