From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E4DEA0526; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:28:02 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCB091BFD1; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:28:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEFE82C6E; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:27:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E365C00F3; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 05:27:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 05:27:59 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=fm1; bh= lyMWkxcNshMTF0/dXqtirqLBodvktt8ohn5Ap0j2Svg=; b=DYIikDVfwZMC1LZ3 Ruun08yDhog5DaCkLnnrW667+z2i9zdNUPE0SgZ3NlHcH01bjppJeKMk9NObVYuZ cmTUMc4OBmTZhwKdypsucpbcUiQiSNWomblbpmjOaiAjW5esrzZLskk9Vdx9qBL7 q3uXkZ2CNMSHZQPjMvnR8tqJeEqu4gjU8ISd07dreE20jeMFyX2hkzu7BN3Ega6B 3Nks6s6zUqF9NNx+Z6g6rKgww2sy2+zzuYmhmKQq6Zc2xVOCJ3OzLkOAkjpZ8YhA +EQaqa/8xiO/qUgwDpyS2e0kX8u3kFSlFBTLcgyoRP4rjYE8ZY0Fb+l1X+1sr5tz W/h/0A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=lyMWkxcNshMTF0/dXqtirqLBodvktt8ohn5Ap0j2S vg=; b=PxNwpanB95PXNl2CY38yctbADeKofux/ZHTZZOm7bSUI3Q4enKSSfIjpT 8skENXZAuNSIPdUirY+iRW6jvIlgm281c8UbQa4bQq26Jw62kp+FlGaWxrSiDaNE tpEnSxTIguHivuPQazhfrp94vktRNyfdvvltYOSvMmRoOgOa7g3ioBopW9pTkwh9 bnRWA6I1c1SXqByLFzgyBQiV50tT0vwNXeBnxB0jvGfPRyPGcr82SQVpfxReFyVY c6MdY1plTBSiu18GWXBX5QdmSt/gmwf2VpiyVxfMhDtYmTbx1Ves5iozIiPFkI4/ vyIarh6TRrbefkyO1oso7eR9Fvedw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrgeelgdduiecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpefhvffufffkjghfggfgtgesthfuredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfhhohhmrghs ucfoohhnjhgrlhhonhcuoehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvghtqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpeffvdffjeeuteelfeeileduudeugfetjeelveefkeejfeeigeehteff vdekfeegudenucffohhmrghinhepughpughkrdhorhhgnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvd dtfedrudekgeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhr ohhmpehthhhomhgrshesmhhonhhjrghlohhnrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 7BAAA3280065; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 05:27:57 -0400 (EDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Jerin Jacob Cc: "Andrzej Ostruszka [C]" , Morten =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Br=F8rup?= , Stephen Hemminger , dpdk-dev , techboard@dpdk.org Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:27:55 +0200 Message-ID: <5216067.OUfDcfORJS@thomas> In-Reply-To: References: <20200306164104.15528-1-aostruszka@marvell.com> <3669914.27dMEtFVk2@thomas> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2 1/4] lib: introduce IF Proxy library X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 22/07/2020 11:09, Jerin Jacob: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:26 PM Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 22/07/2020 10:45, Jerin Jacob: > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 6:10 AM Thomas Monjalon 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?