From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wm0-f45.google.com (mail-wm0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 186B32BFE for ; Tue, 5 Apr 2016 15:58:13 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f45.google.com with SMTP id f198so33408907wme.0 for ; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 06:58:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=6wind-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:organization:user-agent :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JIZ/rLuOvil/md4i9U8EbEWDZjYjE5UEhQxPScXqSXk=; b=CAdFAQRvqlb70s+JS3K6CBFmkYevj6hdpVf0xUwtu0oiPhPqWPoblkbADJbvYEYh4F 2b772KV/+eF1npQQgqANgEvMJ3W/JdHdaJzr+reH8XQXGo0VGo8iGuV0jL5PxtC4AsJJ w8dUgHcKI7cBMDJRsth3B2Oy6aum9+dDWGzoMNU2yeg5AkE7xCXOVPBGBPYgGV5re8f1 oFqo7flZi1Req3CmdOz9ZpznSsPhD8fLiHJxa5T+fWSoYbbZp/eMc4MqKjzWCtifu1ks ZoXCenu/TTtDPjcn8bCotY4GNbHCjK0/HM/ASxhTZOwmbqUdC0qibywB/ZB4gs3ee8At vN0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=JIZ/rLuOvil/md4i9U8EbEWDZjYjE5UEhQxPScXqSXk=; b=iAiWi59j3R6sTSGnvaWAaCEFhvc3Umu39iBUwKWa8jgqjuv/a8ibuX4xWt9pAF84rC RRFxyRV9EsEDDE8em3chonf4ofqU4fFMDYrLd2afsOIucBIvW4fbd3ZrhQHYySREFuUp GiHoe1qYSlpb7izh2iOBghsCnymBppl97297WWAHIhT4UPjX7vnIEVmrCTJzbt6s1GRo nt6YCUoEQ0zhwbCsKG1HgwI3gGgEvhfKIoTQq7oBHrpr1En4IFXMjvlIE2i5kXe+CXPG L0sz7Xb3unTG5ufTfttcg5Ft9oD4Z9JZHL/FoI/PqIAbQL8Fj1UplFQF0xjWYYA3H1kO 3uKw== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKlAltFLZCI31Ejm8JiQDt1/DKhhU/nIo8Dm1QEo76AMDTe7hnzuACOdDAoAEWcMe4o X-Received: by 10.194.172.99 with SMTP id bb3mr15603579wjc.46.1459864692854; Tue, 05 Apr 2016 06:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet (91.111.75.86.rev.sfr.net. [86.75.111.91]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2sm34751095wjf.28.2016.04.05.06.58.11 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 05 Apr 2016 06:58:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: dev@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2016 15:56:34 +0200 Message-ID: <1610488.T03Kyi0Reo@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.10 (Linux/4.1.6-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.11; x86_64; ; ) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: [dpdk-dev] DPDK namespace X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Apr 2016 13:58:13 -0000 DPDK is going to be more popular in Linux distributions. It means people will have some DPDK files in their /usr/include and some DPDK libraries on their system. Let's imagine someone trying to compile an application which needs rte_ethdev.h. He has to figure out that this "rte header" is provided by the DPDK. Hopefully it will be explained on StackOverflow that RTE stands for DPDK. Then someone else will try to run a binary without having installed the DPDK libraries. The linker will require libethdev.so (no prefix here). StackOverflow will probably have another good answer (among wrong ones): "Hey Sherlock Holmes, have you tried to install the DPDK library?" Followed by an insight: "You know, the DPDK naming is weird..." And we could continue the story with developers having some naming clash because of some identifiers not prefixed at all. The goal of this email is to get some feedback on how important it is to fix the DPDK namespace. If there is enough agreement that we should do something, I suggest to introduce the "dpdk_" prefix slowly and live with both "rte_" and "dpdk_" during some time. We could start using the new prefix for the new APIs (example: crypto) or when there is a significant API break (example: mempool). Opinions welcome!