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:
>>>
>>> [image: image.png]
>>>
>>> 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 <https://www.linkedin.com/in/felipe-oliveira-75a651a0>
>

Reply via email to