DPDK community structure changes
 help / color / Atom feed
* [dpdk-moving] Proposing to cancel tomorrow's "Moving DPDK to LF" call
@ 2017-02-20 14:26 O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-02-20 16:36 ` Dave Neary
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2017-02-20 14:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: moving

I propose that we cancel tomorrow's call on "Moving DPDK to the Linux Foundation". The main item we need to talk about is the status of the membership discussions, and whether it's realistic to be ready for a project launch to coincide with ONS at the start of April. However, due to the LF's open source leadership summit last week and a public holiday in the USA today (Presidents' Day), I don't think much will have changed since our last discussion on this. Postponing this for a week will allow more time for 1:1 discussions to happen so that we have a full picture.

If anybody has any concerns, or other topics that they want to cover tomorrow, please comment. If there are no objections then we'll cancel tomorrow's meeting and discuss membership status next week instead.


Tim

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Proposing to cancel tomorrow's "Moving DPDK to LF" call
  2017-02-20 14:26 [dpdk-moving] Proposing to cancel tomorrow's "Moving DPDK to LF" call O'Driscoll, Tim
@ 2017-02-20 16:36 ` Dave Neary
  2017-02-20 22:51   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dave Neary @ 2017-02-20 16:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: moving

Thanks Tim,

I think the main blocking factor at this stage is a budget refresh that
we can use as a basis for relative priorities for expenditure - which
will feed into funding level discussions.

Thanks,
Dave.

On 02/20/2017 09:26 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim wrote:
> I propose that we cancel tomorrow's call on "Moving DPDK to the Linux Foundation". The main item we need to talk about is the status of the membership discussions, and whether it's realistic to be ready for a project launch to coincide with ONS at the start of April. However, due to the LF's open source leadership summit last week and a public holiday in the USA today (Presidents' Day), I don't think much will have changed since our last discussion on this. Postponing this for a week will allow more time for 1:1 discussions to happen so that we have a full picture.
> 
> If anybody has any concerns, or other topics that they want to cover tomorrow, please comment. If there are no objections then we'll cancel tomorrow's meeting and discuss membership status next week instead.
> 
> 
> Tim
> 

-- 
Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Proposing to cancel tomorrow's "Moving DPDK to LF" call
  2017-02-20 16:36 ` Dave Neary
@ 2017-02-20 22:51   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2017-02-20 22:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dave Neary, moving

> From: moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Dave Neary
> 
> Thanks Tim,
> 
> I think the main blocking factor at this stage is a budget refresh that
> we can use as a basis for relative priorities for expenditure - which
> will feed into funding level discussions.

We talked about that at a recent meeting. What we have currently is an estimated budget - essentially a list of things we'd like to fund, and a total budget that seems reasonable given the likely membership and membership rates. We talked about whether we needed to scrub that estimated budget again now, but agreed that it was good enough at the moment.

Once we've confirmed who the expected project members are, and the final membership rates (we seem to be converging on ~$50k for Gold and ~$5-20K for Silver, although we do need to finalise those numbers) then we'll have a clear idea of what the actual budget is likely to be. At that point, we'll definitely need to prioritise and determine what can and cannot be funded.

> 
> Thanks,
> Dave.
> 
> On 02/20/2017 09:26 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim wrote:
> > I propose that we cancel tomorrow's call on "Moving DPDK to the Linux
> Foundation". The main item we need to talk about is the status of the
> membership discussions, and whether it's realistic to be ready for a
> project launch to coincide with ONS at the start of April. However, due
> to the LF's open source leadership summit last week and a public holiday
> in the USA today (Presidents' Day), I don't think much will have changed
> since our last discussion on this. Postponing this for a week will allow
> more time for 1:1 discussions to happen so that we have a full picture.
> >
> > If anybody has any concerns, or other topics that they want to cover
> tomorrow, please comment. If there are no objections then we'll cancel
> tomorrow's meeting and discuss membership status next week instead.
> >
> >
> > Tim
> >
> 
> --
> Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
> Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-02-20 14:26 [dpdk-moving] Proposing to cancel tomorrow's "Moving DPDK to LF" call O'Driscoll, Tim
2017-02-20 16:36 ` Dave Neary
2017-02-20 22:51   ` O'Driscoll, Tim

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