Exactly, we are seeing this issue already happening with a vendor who redirected their NuttX contributors to other projects, causing a bottleneck and friction from community.
We don't want another vendor "kidnapping/blocking" an open-source project. -1 for HAL BR, Alan On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 5:30 AM Alin Jerpelea <[email protected]> wrote: > @Xiang Xiao <[email protected]> > we should ask the vendors > > Hosting the code outside AFS is not an option if we want to co-maintain the > code > > Best regards > Alin > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 10:27 AM Xiang Xiao <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 4:18 PM Alin Jerpelea <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> after reading both sides I tend to agree with both pros and cons so > maybe > >> we can find a middle ground > >> if we host an vendor-HAL repository under NuttX, which is co-maintained > >> by NuttX committers and the vendor representatives > >> - we gain more hands > >> - better integration > >> - ability to share concerns and drive the change > >> - provide guidance and maintain an unified ecosystem for all vendors > >> > >> This would require that the code is transferred to ASF with a SGA from > >> each vendor and the licenses are granted as Apache 2.0 > >> > >> > > It's hard or unacceptable to require that chip vendors transfer the code > > ownership to ASF, > > but I think hosting the code under https://github.com/NuttX doesn't > > require the transfer. > > > > >
