Folks, This conversation is way too heated. Let's try to keep this conversation civil and avoid insults. This level of friction is hurting the NuttX community and discouraging contributors.
Let's steer this discussion back to the original topic of this thread. I'm trying to summarize what has been said so far: Maintainers can't keep up with the amount of PRs. CI bottleneck. Licensing compliance. Falsified ostest logs. Poor commit/PR descriptions. Pierre-Noël can't fix his email client :-) My personal opinion: (1)/(5) This is indeed the elephant in the room. Given that it's quite often the same people submitting substandard PRs, we could apply specific moderation strategies? Like blocking reviews for these users for a set period when their submission is low effort? They could create dozens of GitHub accounts tho. (2) I guess the real solution here is to run the CI once the PR has been lightly vetted by a maintainer. It doesn't take a thorough review, just someone adding a "ci-vetted" tag on the PR. Maybe we could use AI for this vetting process :-) (3) Regarding the licensing/SBOM issues, I don't think AI is adding anything new to the table. I don't think that before the emergence of vibe coding the NuttX maintainers were checking that the code they were merging could be originating from an AGPL codebase, or even worse: leaked proprietary code from a company. As raiden00pl suggested, the Apache Foundation could provide assistance here. (4) This is an important trust issue subject. Users could simply involuntarily run ostest logs from the wrong folder on their computer, or with unstaged changes. I think the best way would be to run ostest in CI, but that would require some development, and also the ability to get the test hardware hosted somewhere (additional costs). Best regards, Jean. > On 4 Feb 2026, at 11:08, chao an <[email protected]> wrote: > > @Sebastien Lorquet <[email protected]> > > I’ve had just about enough of your toxic, hypocritical nonsense. Let’s cut > through your garbage and talk facts: > > 1. 1. Xiaomi’s contributions to NuttX are undeniable. > Their work has driven real progress, fixed critical issues, and expanded > the project’s capabilities. If you’re so unhappy with the community, no one > is forcing you to stay—feel free to leave and stop poisoning the space with > your negativity. > And for the record: I work at ByteDance (TikTok), so I have zero > affiliation with Xiaomi. This isn’t a defense of a company—it’s a defense > of basic fairness and respect for people who actually contribute to this > project. > 2. *2. Let’s talk about your track record.* > - 90% of your commits are trivial, history-driven busywork. Your > so-called “contributions” are negligible at best. > - When was the last time you reviewed a core code change, or > contributed to the CI/CD pipeline that keeps this project running? You’ve > done nothing to move NuttX forward, yet you love to sit on the sidelines > and trash people who *actually* do the work. > - You have zero credibility to judge anyone else’s contributions. > > 3. 3. Shut your mouth already. > Every time I see your bitter, passive-aggressive posts, I feel sick. > You’re nothing but a keyboard warrior, a technical fraud who loves to run > his mouth while contributing nothing of value. Your constant negativity > isn’t constructive—it’s just sad. > > > If you can’t contribute positively or keep your toxic opinions to yourself, > do us all a favor and disappear from this community. We don’t need your > kind here. > > > Sebastien Lorquet <[email protected]> 于2026年2月4日周三 17:33写道： > >> Hello again, >> >> I have warned about this problem for YEARS AND YEARS and it happened >> EXACTLY as I had seen. >> >> It is a good thing to be honest, that will reduce the amount of work >> from nuttx maintainers. >> >> If openvela (as I understand) has good features added by xiaomi, it is >> the task of nuttx to upstream them as they wish, in a calm and positive >> way, by taking enough time to think about the design and structure, >> without all the stress and speed of a commercial corporate project. >> >> NuttX is not a commercial project. it has no targets to reach and no >> investors to please. >> >> It is a much nicer way to work and I think it is better like that. >> >> It is a good thing to have less xiaomi contributions forced in nuttx. >> >> I think we can thank them for their past contributions that made nuttx >> grow, but it is also a good thing to realize when it must stop (eg, >> before NuttX becomes XiaomiX). >> >> Sebastien >> >> >> On 2/4/26 10:11, raiden00pl wrote: >>> I think the root cause is completely different. The real problem here is >>> Xiaomi's >>> attempt to add changes from its entire annual development cycle. Year of >>> changes >>> from a large development team to an open source community with fewer than >>> 10 active >>> members. The community is flooded with changes it can't process, and >> Xiaomi >>> is >>> blocked because they can't add further changes based on unmerged changes. >>> The tension is rising, and we have what we have: a disaster. This >> approach >>> is >>> an obvious recipe for failure. >>> >>> This approach hasn't worked recently, and it's not working now. The >> Xiaomi >>> team >>> is growing much faster than the NuttX community. The number of changes >> from >>> Xiaomi >>> is growing, and it has now reached absurd proportions. >>> If these changes were added gradually, without waiting for the end of the >>> year, >>> the problem would be much smaller. >>
