From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f169.google.com (mail-qk0-f169.google.com [209.85.220.169]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D83EC5A44 for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 13:14:56 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qk0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 11so17966010qkl.3 for ; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 04:14:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=LfmzCgTQvTBudoJGH5NIy1+o14Nf7DnmwtbU7rgPJeE=; b=dp7fygZfcX79xqMqjq2edS2X2bv9pwed2Ud8alxv7PjORG1QV4EIPV1e0GGBQDESyj NWtWUG9OaIXfP+70TzuKu7pR3W5V6mL1BHQPmVm82SzMttojmfvz4nN0AaLYewexPUUv PIlzQJ26a2eLufE0fhVjID65n0R90musvfdzfVM+mATjaMhfzqXYhpqwCqFV2n8f3LlX 6qEeveSc6s6MsbULCPaLB6HdftC9qKWP4mHUBfB2GYwGwmbARAl41D2mS/TW/MrkJ6Dm aTci4ntzhwqcU/LxHNVSSwgIgPKIV8QaaqxSzH7ANItHbP0fv21ZcF98xpB+SWhn2onF oROw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=LfmzCgTQvTBudoJGH5NIy1+o14Nf7DnmwtbU7rgPJeE=; b=jj3UQkjdcJlAsqJP1SKvekTIWubf2fCfNNO1zC4LJBOKqgI6KpnmTq/C0eQ/6RBYzm UtVx2O3HZGvAMFehZ54gsOTW8cP6xvR/HI2LDiKV3kgw7pZfsJGOv8Ff/oHLMEpdOvOR rF+T0DHRwPkeJE1jBOslOEq0qHq2ljQquqSM2uhi0F37+AImauqPQhQX5QcCRerRY1Lz Mn4+wdr1ahG8tdSz/DYLUSqDeJmE+Jx9UenhfIzu+57YXE1fgQZ26cjP11Sl3yFre2HV NS8iTNMURog6OGer+/7KAA9sZ0Uy+sKE9xgjeEalWToCc9pMq0P3yunwgsJA8eo2HvwF UEig== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXL5q5OvkWOxF1703MeIkyFSKuusuSdtsK/jQVamiwP3LZKVIQCB9jQSM6QRV8t6aJN2+Gaa24eHMhqsSw== X-Received: by 10.55.112.65 with SMTP id l62mr14754313qkc.76.1484223296290; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 04:14:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.53.225 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Jan 2017 04:14:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA722A6EC0@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA722A66A1@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA722A6EC0@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Ed Warnicke Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 05:14:55 -0700 Message-ID: To: "O'Driscoll, Tim" Cc: Francois Ozog , "moving@dpdk.org" , Dave Neary Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114fe71457c9440545e4aa44 Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 10th 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: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 12:14:57 -0000 --001a114fe71457c9440545e4aa44 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Has the question of moving the infra (the actual servers/services behind dpdk.org) over to LF come up? Ed On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 5:07 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim wrote: > > > > From: Francois Ozog [mailto:francois.ozog@linaro.org] > > Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 9:09 AM > > To: O'Driscoll, Tim > > Cc: moving@dpdk.org; Dave Neary > > Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux > Foundation" call, January 10th > > > > Hi, > > > > Thanks for the update. > > > > I have missed a couple of calls and did not found notes on the following > topic: dpdk.org domain ownership. > > > > I think i has been a discussion topic during Dublin and thought that > Dave Neary may have said (unsure) that it was assumed that the dpdk.org > domain ownership should be transferred to LF. > > > > Was there a discussion/conclusion on this ? > > Yes, the question was asked during the discussion in Dublin (by Dave I > think). This is what Dave captured in his minutes of that discussion: > > "When asked about transferring the ownership of the domain name to Linux > Foundation, Vincent reiterated that his main concern was keeping the > project open, and that he did not anticipate that transferring the > domain ownership would be an issue." > > Vincent can confirm, but hopefully this means that there's no issue with > this. > > > > > Cordially, > > > > FF > > --001a114fe71457c9440545e4aa44 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Has the question of moving the infra (the actual servers/s= ervices behind dpdk.org) over to LF come up= ?

Ed

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 5:07 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com> wrote:


> From: Francois Ozog [mailto:francois.ozog@linaro.org]
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 9:09 AM
> To: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
> Cc: moving@dpdk.org; Dave Neary= <dneary@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Fou= ndation" call, January 10th
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the update.
>
> I have missed a couple of calls and did not found notes on the followi= ng topic: = dpdk.org domain ownership.
>
> I think i has been a discussion topic during Dublin and thought that D= ave Neary may have said (unsure) that it was assumed that the dpdk.org domain own= ership should be transferred to LF.=C2=A0
>
> Was there a discussion/conclusion on this ?

Yes, the question was asked during the discussion in Dublin (by Dave= I think). This is what Dave captured in his minutes of that discussion:
"When asked about transferring the ownership of the domain name to Lin= ux
Foundation, Vincent reiterated that his main concern was keeping the
project open, and that he did not anticipate that transferring the
domain ownership would be an issue."

Vincent can confirm, but hopefully this means that there's no issue wit= h this.

>
> Cordially,
>
> FF


--001a114fe71457c9440545e4aa44--