Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] lib: introduce IF Proxy library

[Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>]

22/07/2020 11:09, Jerin Jacob:
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:26 PM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > 22/07/2020 10:45, Jerin Jacob:
> > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 6:10 AM Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > In addition may I ask your opinion on the changes that are required
> > > > > before the library can be accepted?
> > > >
> > > > Very few contributors take time to look at it.
> > > > Clearly we want this feature. We really want it,
> > > > but we are not able to dedicate enough time for its review (blaming myself).
> > > > That's why I Cc the techboard to try a new process:
> > > >
> > > > For such feature requiring a community design,
> > > > and not having enough feedback to progress in a timely manner,
> > > > I propose drafting the design in a Technical Board meeting
> > > > (a regular or specific one).
> > >
> > > Since the patch series already have the documentation for library[1],
> > > example application [2]
> > > in addition to the implementation.
> > > For everyone's benefit, it would good to know what is the expectation
> > > of draft design so that one can create
> > > such a document as part of the new process and it can apply for new
> > > another library.
> > >
> > > [1] http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/71953/
> > > [2] http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/71956/
> >
> > I don't understand Jerin.
> > What is your question?
> > Are you proposing to include a design document as part of the patches?
> 
> No
> 
> > In my opinion, the cover letter is a good place to explain a design.
> 
> Agree.
> 
> Currently, In the patch series already have the design[1] in the cover
> letter and documentation[2]
> [1]
> http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2020-June/171070.html
> [2]
> http://patches.dpdk.org/patch/71953/
> 
> Thomas, I did not understand the expectation of "I propose drafting
> the design in a Technical Board meeting".
> You mean, Techboard will define/draft the design? or Are you expecting
> anything from the patch submitter otherthan
> participating in the discussion.
> The description is not clear, Hence I am asking.

OK now I understand what is not clear :)

Because this design discussion is not progressing enough on the mailing list,
I propose discussing in a techboard meeting with Andrzej,
and come to a conclusion about what are the expectations.
The goal is to approve the technical direction,
so Andrzej can rework while being sure his work will be accepted.

Does it make sense?