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>
