DPDK community structure changes
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
To: "moving@dpdk.org" <moving@dpdk.org>
Subject: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, November 8th
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2016 17:48:31 +0000
Message-ID: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA6760F60F@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)

Here are my notes from yesterday's call. Please feel free to correct any errors or to add additional details.

Attendees: Amnon Ilan (Red Hat), Ed Warnicke (Cisco), Francois-Frederic Ozog (Linaro), Hemant Agrawal (NXP), Jan Blunck (Brocade), Jaswinder Singh (NXP), Jerin Jacob (Cavium), Jim St. Leger (Intel), John Bromhead (Cavium), John McNamara (Intel), Keith Wiles (Intel), Matt Spencer (ARM), Mike Dolan (Linux Foundation), Prasun Kapoor (Cavium), Shreyansh Jain (NXP), Thomas Monjalon (6WIND), Tim O'Driscoll (Intel), Vincent Jardin (6WIND). Note that there may have been others, but as people joined at different times it was difficult to keep track.

1. Discussed whether to adopt a zero budget model like OVS or to pursue a budget/membership model.
We discussed budget requirements for CI and events. For CI:
- Discussed CI & performance test requirements, including the benefits of distributed (vendors do CI/performance tests in private in their own labs and publish the results in public) versus centralized (tests are run in an open, public lab) models. Some (including Vincent) favoured a distributed model. Others (including Ed and Jim) favoured a centralized model.
- More specific details of CI & performance test requirements will be discussed on the ci@dpdk.org mailing list.
- Approximate costs for hosting a full rack (20U) in the LF data center in Montreal are ~$2k/month in hosting costs plus 0.5 of a Sys Admin plus (recommended but not mandatory) 0.5 of a Release Manager. This gives a total of ~$200k/year. The LF team are working on a more detailed estimate. Ed felt that this estimate was on the low side and that DPDK would require a full-time Release Manager based on his experiences in FD.io and other projects.

For events:
- Budget estimate that was created earlier in the year (see https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=302618256) included $170K for events. This covered costs for a PRC Summit, a European Summit/Userspace event, and partial costs for a US Summit (the balance to be generated via sponsorship and registration fees).
- We need to explore options for co-locating our events with other networking events next year.

There was support for a budget/membership model from John Bromhead, Jaswinder and Jim. There were some concerns expressed by Vincent. Overall, we agreed that we will require a budget for some lab resources (details TBD) and for events, which means we need to pursue a budget/membership model.

2. Project Charter
The draft charter is at: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x43ycfW3arJNX-e6NQt3OVzAuNXtD7dppIhrY48FoGs/edit. People should review and comment on this.

Thomas expressed a concern over technical governance being kept independent of budget. This is what we agreed in Dublin and is spelled out in section 4.d of the charter, which specifies that the Governing Board plays no role in technical governance for any of the DPDK projects. If people don't feel this is sufficiently clear then we can discuss at the next meeting. Francois-Frederic described the intent well - the board establishes the constitution, and the projects define the laws.

We'll use next week's meeting to step through the comments on the charter and agree on what changes we want to make.

The Technical Governance section is just a skeleton at the moment. As I said during the meeting, I'm not the right person to create a draft proposal for this. It would be great to have comments/contributions on technical governance for DPDK and also for Pktgen/SPP/DTS.

Next Meeting:
Tuesday November 15th at 3pm GMT/4pm CET/10am EST/7am PST) next Tuesday. Agenda is to review comments on the draft charter and discuss what changes we want to make.

                 reply	other threads:[~2016-11-09 17:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

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=26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA6760F60F@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com \
    --to=tim.odriscoll@intel.com \
    --cc=moving@dpdk.org \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK community structure changes

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	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 \
	public-inbox-index moving

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:

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