Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] doc: move testpmd guide with other tools

["Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>]

> On Nov 10, 2016, at 5:02 PM, Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com> wrote:
> 
> 2016-11-10 16:11, Mcnamara, John:
>> I had a look at the html output before and after this patch and I don't quite agree with it. I see that you are trying to clean up and make the documentation more consistent but I don't know if this is the right way to do it.
>> 
>> The problem is that TestPMD is a bit of an outlier. It isn't a sample application and it isn't really a test application despite the name (it is more of a tester application). Also I don't think that it is a tool/utility like the other apps in the target directory (if it is seen as a tool then it should be renamed to something like dpdk-tester for consistency). Testpmd also has quite a lot of documentation, more than any of our other apps or utilities, which again makes it an outlier.
> 
> Yes testpmd is not the same kind of tool as others. It helps for tests,
> debugging and demos.
> 
> About the name, as it is packaged as part of the runtime, I think we should
> find a better name. As you said it should start with "dpdk-" and it should
> contain "net" as it does not test the crypto drivers.
> Something like dpdk-testpmd-net.

To me the name dpdk-testpmd-net is a bit long and does testpmd really just test PMDs. I was thinking of the name dpdk-tester is really pretty short and descriptive IMO. Adding net or pmd to the name does not really add anything as dpdk is kind of networking. Just my $0.04 worth. 

> 
>> So my preference is to leave TestPMD in the high level index.
> 
> OK I understand your opinion.
> 
>> However, I do think the High level index should be cleaned up a bit and the items re-ordered into a more logical sequence. I'll submit a patch for that.
> 
> OK thanks

Regards,
Keith