From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga09.intel.com (mga09.intel.com [134.134.136.24]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE9B52C8 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 00:35:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by orsmga102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Nov 2016 15:35:14 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,496,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="1059928173" Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155]) by orsmga001.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 15 Nov 2016 15:35:13 -0800 Received: from irsmsx103.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.3.190]) by IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.226]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Tue, 15 Nov 2016 23:35:13 +0000 From: "Mcnamara, John" To: "moving@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: Proposal a Committer model Thread-Index: AdI/l7PhpM0xx4kTSdma4UibzjQDRg== Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 23:35:12 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiNTY4MDkyNDAtZmEzNS00NWM1LWJmZjgtNGVmYmE2NTRmMDE1IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjkuNi42IiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IjRuQStiWlI3dzFIVmtudERRbzVhTXBiTldpbEFDK1RmWHpWOXRCTGRhNmc9In0= x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-moving] Proposal a Committer model 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: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 23:35:16 -0000 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.=20 One committer to master represents a single point of failure and at times c= an be inefficient. There is also no agreed cover for times when the committ= er 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 thr= ee committers for each release that can commit changes to the master branch= . =20 There are a number of benefits: =20 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 fast= er turnaround - ideally, maintainers should also provide feedback on patche= s submitted within a 2-3 day period, as much as possible, to facilitate thi= s.=20 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 pa= rticipants, no single person should be required to make all of the decision= s on patches to be included in the release. =20 Having multiple committers will require some degree of co-ordination but th= ere are a number of other communities successfully following this model suc= h as Apache, OVS, FD.io, OpenStack etc. so the approach is workable. John