DPDK community structure changes
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>,
	"moving@dpdk.org" <moving@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] description of technical governance
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2016 10:21:53 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67607DDE@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4939831.0LCNYxqha0@xps13>

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 3:00 PM
> To: moving@dpdk.org
> Cc: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] description of technical governance
> 2016-10-25 11:27, O'Driscoll, Tim:
> > We also have a gap in terms of documenting technical governance.
> > Even ignoring the move to LF, Matt in particular was looking for
> > more clarity on this.
> > Thomas: would you be willing to create and post a proposal on this?
> The technical governance is consensus-based.
> The board was built in case a consensus is not found.
> There are several projects with their own git trees.
> DPDK and the web site are two of them.
> The DPDK project is organized around some git subtrees
> and the mainline gathers every contributions accepted in the subtrees.
> The component maintainers are quality responsibles for the code and
> the git history. They coordinate how improvements and fixes are done.
> The git tree committers are responsibles of the pace, giving time for
> reviews and tests while releasing in time. They also do the last checks
> or call for help when there is no progress on a patch.
> Is it the kind of information you are looking for?
> I think the technical governance must be described on the web site
> in the "development" page.
> It is already partly described but it may requires more details and
> updates.

Yes, it's the additional detail that I was asking about. If you look at what we have at the moment (http://dpdk.org/dev), it's quite brief. Other projects typically have more detail, for example:
- FD.io Technical Community Charter: https://fd.io/governance/technical-community-charter
- OvS technical governance including committer responsibilities and process for adding and removing committers: http://openvswitch.github.io/contributors/
- ODL TSC Charter: https://www.opendaylight.org/tsc-charter

We don't necessarily need as much detail as they have, but I think we do need a bit more than we have at the moment. From a brief discussion with Mike Dolan during our previous engagement with the LF earlier in the year, the LF would simply be looking for DPDK technical governance to be properly documented, and for it to be meritocratic (e.g. committers chosen based on history of contributions rather than the company they work for).

Matt also had some thoughts during our discussion in Dublin on things he'd like to see added to the technical governance. Perhaps he can comment further on what he'd like to see.

In terms of where this is documented, I don't think that matters, and adding some additional detail to the existing Development page seems like a good solution to me.

  reply	other threads:[~2016-10-26 10:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-10-25  8:58 [dpdk-moving] [Topics] Francois Ozog
2016-10-25 11:27 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-25 14:00   ` [dpdk-moving] description of technical governance Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-26 10:21     ` O'Driscoll, Tim [this message]
2016-10-28  9:13       ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-28 16:52         ` Matt Spencer
2016-10-28 19:22           ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-28 22:54             ` Vincent Jardin
2016-10-31 15:20               ` Matt Spencer
2016-10-31 16:07                 ` Michael Dolan
2016-10-31 16:18                   ` Matt Spencer
2016-10-31 16:33                     ` Michael Dolan
2016-10-31 16:43                       ` Matt Spencer
2016-10-31 16:52                         ` Michael Dolan
2016-10-31 16:56                           ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-31 16:58                             ` Michael Dolan
2016-10-31 18:31                             ` Jan Blunck
2016-10-31 19:41                               ` Vincent JARDIN
     [not found]                   ` <DB5PR04MB1605482F1C67F9B797EB9AE289A60@DB5PR04MB1605.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
2016-11-08  8:11                     ` Jaswinder Singh
2016-11-08  9:37                       ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-12-20 14:41       ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-25 14:55 ` [dpdk-moving] [Topics] Dave Neary
2016-10-26 12:47 ` Dave Neary
2016-10-26 15:00   ` Francois Ozog

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67607DDE@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=tim.odriscoll@intel.com \
    --cc=moving@dpdk.org \
    --cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).