DPDK community structure changes
 help / color / Atom feed
* [dpdk-moving] Proposal for a new Committer model
@ 2016-11-17  9:20 Mcnamara, John
  2016-11-18  6:00 ` [dpdk-moving] [dpdk-dev] " Matthew Hall
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Mcnamara, John @ 2016-11-17  9:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: dev, moving

Repost from the moving@dpdk.org mailing list to get a wider audience.
Original thread: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000059.html


Hi,

I'd like to propose a change to the DPDK committer model. Currently we have one committer for the master branch of the DPDK project. 

One committer to master represents a single point of failure and at times can be inefficient. There is also no agreed cover for times when the committer is unavailable such as vacation, public holidays, etc. I propose that we change to a multi-committer model for the DPDK project. We should have three committers for each release that can commit changes to the master branch.
 
There are a number of benefits:
 
1. Greater capacity to commit patches.
2. No single points of failure - a committer should always be available if we have three.
3. A more timely committing of patches. More committers should equal a faster turnaround - ideally, maintainers should also provide feedback on patches submitted within a 2-3 day period, as much as possible, to facilitate this. 
4. It follows best practice in creating a successful multi-vendor community - to achieve this we must ensure there is a level playing field for all participants, no single person should be required to make all of the decisions on patches to be included in the release.  

Having multiple committers will require some degree of co-ordination but there are a number of other communities successfully following this model such as Apache, OVS, FD.io, OpenStack etc. so the approach is workable.

John

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] [dpdk-dev] Proposal for a new Committer model
  2016-11-17  9:20 [dpdk-moving] Proposal for a new Committer model Mcnamara, John
@ 2016-11-18  6:00 ` " Matthew Hall
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Hall @ 2016-11-18  6:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mcnamara, John; +Cc: dev, moving

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 09:20:50AM +0000, Mcnamara, John wrote:
> One committer to master represents a single point of failure and at times can be inefficient.

I have a lot more issues because of slow or inconclusive review of patches 
than I do because of committers. Often times they just get rejected in 
Patchwork with no feedback. Or it takes forever to get reviews.

I don't think the committer is the right place to point to the single point of 
failure.

Matthew.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2016-11-17  9:20 [dpdk-moving] Proposal for a new Committer model Mcnamara, John
2016-11-18  6:00 ` [dpdk-moving] [dpdk-dev] " Matthew Hall

DPDK community structure changes

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/moving/0 moving/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 moving moving/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/moving \
		moving@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index moving


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.moving


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox