Re: [dpdk-dev] DPDK namespace

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

2016-04-11 16:10, Don Provan:
> I can't believe you guys are seriously considering changing the prefix from rte_. That's a nightmare at the practical level, but it really doesn't make as much sense as some of you seem to think. I've always been really impressed that the names were prefixed with rte_ instead of dpdk_. While the primary goal was to provide dataplane capabilities, so much of the library -- mempools and rings, for example -- is general purpose, so a dpdk_ prefix wouldn't be appropriate for those routines, anyway.
> 
> The idea that everything in the library should be named "dpdk" is the same thinking that leads to the monolithic initialization function I've complained about before. I have major applications that use the DPDK library but do nothing at all with hardware, yet the library still insists on initializing the PCI components because there's no concept of using the library for anything other than receiving packets from hardware.

It's good news to hear that DPDK allows you to develop major applications.
The BSD license allows to build a lot of various types of applications.
You are perfectly right to give your opinion and complain.
You would also be welcome to contribute and fix your concerns.