Thanks for the votes.

The intention of this call was to check of any limitation or strong preference you may have to one of the solutions.

Will be great if there is an ability to contribute to implementation.

From: Ken Liu via TF-M <tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 12:59 AM
To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: [TF-M] Re: TF-M on GitHub opinions collection

Vote for 3 at the current stage.

/Ken

From: Andrej Butok via TF-M <tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 8:48 PM
To: Anton Komlev <Anton.Komlev@arm.com>
Cc: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-M] Re: TF-M on GitHub opinions collection

Vote for (2),

to use one GH eco-system, avoid additional overhead to support mirrors and different committing/reviewing systems.

From: Anton Komlev via TF-M <tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 1:35 PM
To: tf-m@lists.trustedfirmware.org
Cc: nd <nd@arm.com>
Subject: [TF-M] TF-M on GitHub opinions collection

Hello,

Quite some time ago there was a proposal to move TF-M into GitHub. The main motivation is: more convenient review process, the Wiki for knowledge sharing and issue tracking facility.

This idea had been discussed multiple times in TSC. The following options were considered:

1. Hybrid: Add TF-M on GitHub with 2 ways synchronization between GitHub and existing Git/Gerrit
2. GitHub only: Move to GitHub completely and drop Gerrit.
3. Mirror: Create a read-only mirror on GitHub. TF-M review process stays in Gerrit but Wiki and issue tracking are on GitHub.
4. Nothing: Stay on Gerrit as good enough solution.

The options are ordered by complexity and cost each has pros and cons. The Mirror option (3) seeing as the best compromise and practically affordable in a short time.

Please share your opinion and comments on the topic with any dependencies or specific requirements to be considered.

Thanks,

Anton