Re: [dpdk-dev] drivers/crypto sub-tree maintainer volunteer

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>]

2015-10-21 12:06, Declan Doherty:
> On 21/10/15 10:34, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > Should we create a separate mailing list and patchwork?
> 
> personally I think keeping a single mailing list for the moment is 
> preferable. The mailing lists volume isn't so great yet

I would say we need to reduce the volume on dev@dpdk.org.

> that we need 
> separate lists, also by creating a list for each sub-tree, is there a 
> danger that we could stratify the discussion, developers would need to 
> keep abreast of work being done in each sub-tree

I think a lot of developers don't really care about the internals of the drivers
and some care only about drivers. But having too many list archives can be
cumbersome. What about enforcing some tags in the mail titles or using some
email aliases redirecting to dev@dpdk.org? It would allow to filter emails.

> and to keep track of 
> each multiple lists, especially as there will no doubt be patch sets 
> that will go into a sub tree that also contain changes which affect code 
> outside of that tree.

If a patchset is about crypto, it must be managed in the crypto tree,
even if it touches small parts of EAL and obviously doc, config, apps.
But the crypto API must be changed with more care. Maybe there could be
a double-ack rule.

> I'm not sure if separate patchwork lists are possible without separate 
> mailing lists but we could work around that by allowing sub-tree 
> committers access to modify the main patchwork list, when the commit 
> patches.

It's better to have dedicated patchwork to make review of a specific area easier.
By using tags or mail alias, we can redirect to the right patchwork.

Opinions?