From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga02.intel.com (mga02.intel.com [134.134.136.20]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 341F2942C for ; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:59:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga002.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.21]) by orsmga101.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Oct 2015 03:59:21 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,711,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="831632790" Received: from unknown (HELO dwdohert-dpdk-fedora-20.ir.intel.com) ([163.33.213.96]) by orsmga002.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 21 Oct 2015 03:59:21 -0700 To: Thomas Monjalon References: <56275A4B.3020404@intel.com> <1966310.GiTWNYAt9M@xps13> From: Declan Doherty Message-ID: <562771CA.5030105@intel.com> Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:06:50 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1966310.GiTWNYAt9M@xps13> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] drivers/crypto sub-tree maintainer volunteer 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: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 10:59:22 -0000 On 21/10/15 10:34, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-10-21 10:26, Declan Doherty: >> I'm just following up on discussions from DPDK user space and the on >> going discussions regarding the maintenance of development sub-trees >> etc. I just wanted to re-iterate my offer to maintain a sub-tree for the >> cryptodev library and all crypto PMDs in drivers/crypto. > > Thanks Declan > >> Thomas, I will leave it up to you whether you want to wait until the >> initial patch set has been merged into main and then create the >> sub-tree, or whether you would like to create the sub-tree now and take >> the crypto features as a pull request after they have been fully >> reviewed and acked. > > We can manage the initial import directly and prepare the crypto tree > in the meantime. Please send your SSH key. Will do. > 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 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 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. 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.