From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77FE942F47; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 23:00:39 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB2E840A7F; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 23:00:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 593BC406A2; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 23:00:38 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0D4B5C00CC; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 17:00:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 25 Jul 2023 17:00:34 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:date :date:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t= 1690318834; x=1690405234; bh=rxvpgRlAJhvWBK9STqXR7+XOJATIQsALKoH Ra6wEKk0=; b=JKvTbhNZZ6F0El51gpQM/ZVa6ptkKhNHsJjQpXUW8pkm2OO4qBV 7Ck3KtyF9j8f2VoSMDPqpLCZXchZnztoWe7KDFSerPClG+yfe8CUPjTjxMS0i3GM vAIGJw4im1Eov+gKryrCfKvgXd/UAlQrnsq4UT8CK1kh0QGmQTyxHWWRV8otqY8M UWQjFFrXmJkRPuicD17OjNdcwaJlMF02ecAXtLiSfeRCkZfcsl7mJJkeM2LjO7tc xnPwQcJ4gAjFLx0X4lZnkk76Ugp8OaQDrLavb6wUOBFegZ0oNmiV3Bf3MZuvOIWq sgeVR3WQ6qc5BRmW0OqOlJ88pptNuhjjXog== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:content-type:date:date:feedback-id:feedback-id :from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1690318834; x=1690405234; bh=rxvpgRlAJhvWBK9STqXR7+XOJATIQsALKoH Ra6wEKk0=; b=HQXHTDGv4duRRECdEoD0RYMUUpx3vXdpkhE90wI09vZjmwYUCeN DygSKMPFKOuIJ8y9XXPBbHI+uphqTgyu2UcfPeyJA7yfif8d3f/blseN9CQp1jP3 OLbd0+nermj9wO1AEAITMo4Mv8X3TaLtR3hkUs1CERu4buOn6HtpPSgfoIXa/VOW 31t+38vOwU7SDTtLaoM0DKtX6SIgZ4lS13jS1/jWEhZ+OSEgppvZplKIt+JKaIVR gNMInwhU60KKwOlUo5nmBdvHCiNdY6zKQhxdS/LQ3WeuMQgROYavIrtBvGjBrAU1 N1Ki9tQ8A5fx5qVsKm43plizKjymXUx957A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedviedriedtgdduheefucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhephffvvefufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhm rghsucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenuc ggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeejjefffffgffekfefflefgkeelteejffelledugefhheelffet heevudffudfgvdenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuih iivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhho nhdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i47234305:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 25 Jul 2023 17:00:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: jerinj@marvell.com Cc: dev@dpdk.org, david.marchand@redhat.com, techboard@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] doc: process for new library approval in principle Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2023 12:19:19 +0200 Message-ID: <3976070.AxlXzFCzgd@thomas> In-Reply-To: <6db81d4a-4d5d-3d20-be73-01f7b56c0114@amd.com> References: <20230213092616.3589932-1-jerinj@marvell.com> <20230518132139.1350234-1-jerinj@marvell.com> <6db81d4a-4d5d-3d20-be73-01f7b56c0114@amd.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org > > Based on techboard meeting[1] action item, defining the process for a > > new library approval in principle. > > > > [1] > > https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2023-January/260035.html > > > > Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob > > --- > > RFC..v1: > > - Fix the review comments by Konstantin, Keven, Thomas at > > http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230213092616.3589932-1-jerinj@marvell.com/ [...] > > +Process for new library approval in principle > > +============================================= > > + > > +Rationale > > +--------- > > + > > +Adding a new library to DPDK with proper RFC and then full patch-sets is significant work. > > +In order to save effort, developers will get an early approval in principle, or early feedback in > > +case the library is not suitable for various reasons. > > + > > +Process > > +------- > > + > > +#. When a contributor would like to add a new library to DPDK code base, the contributor must send > > + the following items to DPDK mailing list for technical board approval-in-principle. > > + > > + * Purpose of the library. > > + * Scope of work: outline the various additional tasks planned for this library, such as > > + developing new test applications, adding new drivers, and updating existing applications. > > + * Expected usage models of the library. > > + * Any licensing constraints. > > + * Justification for adding to DPDK. > > + * Any other implementations of the same functionality in other libraries/projects and how this > > + version differs. > > + * Public API specification header file as RFC. > > + > > + * Optional and good to have. > > + * Technical board may additionally request this collateral if needed to get more clarity > > + on scope and purpose. > > + * Any new library dependencies to DPDK. > > + > > +#. Technical board to schedule discussion on this in upcoming technical board meeting along with > > + author. Based on the technical board schedule and/or author availability, technical board may > > + need a maximum of **five** technical board meeting slots. > > + > > +#. Based on mailing list and technical board meeting discussions, technical board to vote and share > > + the decision in the mailing list. The decision outcome can be any of the following. > > + > > + * Approved in principal > > + * Not approved > > + * Further information needed > > + > > +#. Once technical board approves the library in principle, it is safe to start working on the > > + implementation. However, the patches will need to meet the usual quality criteria in order to be > > + effectively accepted. > > > Looks reasonable to me, and it is good to start to document the process > anyway, we can tweak it later if required, hence: > > Acked-by: Ferruh Yigit I prefer the new page having a broader scope: adding a new library. So I make this new doc as a chapter of a new page "Adding a new library". Applied, thanks. Later we could add some tips for new libraries: what to copy elsewhere, what to not forget (maintainer, doc, test, doc indexes, etc).