From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga14.intel.com (mga14.intel.com [192.55.52.115]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A92D42934 for ; Wed, 14 Dec 2016 18:45:52 +0100 (CET) Received: from fmsmga001.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.23]) by fmsmga103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2016 09:45:51 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,347,1477983600"; d="scan'208";a="1081827314" Received: from irsmsx107.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.99]) by fmsmga001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 14 Dec 2016 09:45:50 -0800 Received: from irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com (10.108.20.5) by IRSMSX107.ger.corp.intel.com (163.33.3.99) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.248.2; Wed, 14 Dec 2016 17:45:49 +0000 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.173]) by irsmsx112.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.1.86]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Wed, 14 Dec 2016 17:45:49 +0000 From: "O'Driscoll, Tim" To: "moving@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, December 13th Thread-Index: AdJWLxFJwhqQGTaOSsC36c0u8FMzRw== Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 17:45:49 +0000 Message-ID: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA72294E34@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiOTA5YzI3NjQtZmFiNy00NGE2LThhY2UtOGEzZTdjY2Q1NWY4IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE2LjIuMTEuMCIsIlRydXN0ZWRMYWJlbEhhc2giOiJCZ1JoTjB5UEFVaWM4bUxcL1pEVzUyTUxtZlFiSmNjV2ZWYXplWXZOczZvTT0ifQ== x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.180] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, December 13th X-BeenThere: moving@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK community structure changes List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 17:45:53 -0000 Here are my notes from Tuesday's call. Please feel free to correct any erro= rs or to add additional details. Attendees: Ed Warnicke (Cisco), Francois-Frederic Ozog (Linaro), Hemant Agr= awal (NXP), Jan Blunck (Brocade), Jaswinder Singh (NXP), John Bromhead (Cav= ium), Keith Wiles (Intel), Kevin Traynor (Red Hat), Matt Spencer (ARM), Olg= a Shern (Mellanox), Thomas Monjalon (6WIND), Tim O'Driscoll (Intel), Yoni L= uzon (Mellanox). Note that there may have been others, but as people joined= at different times it was difficult to keep track. Firstly, here are some links to help keep track of things: Project Charter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x43ycfW3arJNX-e6NQt3OV= zAuNXtD7dppIhrY48FoGs Summary of discussion at Userspace event in Dublin: http://dpdk.org/ml/arch= ives/dev/2016-October/049259.html Minutes of October 31st call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-Novem= ber/000031.html Minutes of November 8th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-Novem= ber/000058.html Minutes of November 15th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-Nove= mber/000061.html Minutes of November 22nd call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-Nove= mber/000085.html Minutes of November 29th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-Nove= mber/000099.html Minutes of December 6th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-Decem= ber/000121.html Current technical governance, including composition of the Tech Board: http= ://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/index.html & http://dpdk.org/dev. A lot of yesterday's meeting was taken up with issues that we've discussed = and reached a conclusion on previously. Some degree of that is inevitable, = but where possible we should avoid doing this as it slows things down. 1. Next week's meeting: Most people seem to be available so we'll continue with that. After that we= 'll break for 2 weeks for the holiday period and then we can resume again. 2. CI: This came up again, in relation to an open CI lab (similar to FD.io's CSIT)= and the costs associated with this. During previous discussions on this we= agreed: - CI discussions should be on the ci@dpdk.org mailing list. - It's not realistic for DPDK to have a lab setup of the size of FD.io. The= refore, Thomas has implemented a distributed CI system that's integrated wi= th Patchwork. - We do want a reference lab for performance testing. We'll need to keep th= is small initially in order to control costs. 3. Contributor membership level: At last week's meeting we decided not to have a Contributor membership leve= l based largely on guidance from Mike Dolan who said that it doesn't add an= y real benefit but does add complexity. Matt questioned what complexity thi= s actually adds. Mike: Can you clarify the reasons for not having a Contributor level? We should aim to reach a final decision on this at next week's meeting. 4. Technical governance: Agreed that the Technical Governance section of the doc (section 5) will ju= st reference other locations in which this info is already captured. I've u= pdated the doc accordingly. 5. Composition of Tech Board: A number of questions came up, mostly ones that we've discussed and disposi= tioned before. These were: - Do we review and update the Tech Board membership as things have changed = since it was put in place about a year ago. My proposal is that we ask the = Tech Board to consider this and remove any members who are no longer active= and add any new ones that they think merit inclusion. - Discussed the possibility of limiting participation to 1 rep per company.= The issue with this is that it distorts meritocracy. We have an item in th= e charter (section 3.2.2, item III.c) specifying that no single company can= have a majority. - The question came up again of the Governing Board defining policy for the= Technical Board to implement. We've discussed and concluded previously tha= t we don't want to do this. - Keith suggested holding Tech Board meetings at regular intervals, perhaps= monthly. That's something the Tech Board should consider. - The question came up again of whether members should get a seat on the Te= ch Board. We've agreed previously that we don't want to do this. 6.Efficiency of the review process: As part of the Tech Board discussions, the topic of patch reviews came up: - The question of slow reviews came up specifically in relation to a patch = set a few months ago from NXP. - The key issue with reviews is that participating companies allocate time = from their engineers to make contributions, but don't always allocate time = for them to do reviews. The only way to fix this problem is for all partici= pating companies to allocate more time to reviews. Thomas in particular has= been highlighting this gap since the beginning of the open source project. - Maintainer responsibilities are being documented by John McNamara in the = Contributor's Guidelines. Details are in this thread: http://dpdk.org/ml/ar= chives/dev/2016-December/051201.html. Those with ideas for improvement shou= ld contribute to that thread on the mailing list. Next Meeting: Tuesday December 20th at 3pm GMT, 4pm CET, 10am EST, 7am PST. We should try= to disposition any remaining comments on the charter so that we have a goo= d draft in place before the end of the year. I think we also need to identi= fy the remaining things that we need to do to complete this process (finali= se charter, get it reviewed/approved by LF, determine membership contributi= on levels, recruit members, launch project etc.) and agree some target date= s for these. That will give us a timeline to work towards. I'll post some f= urther thoughts on this ahead of the next meeting.