From: Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com>
To: "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>,
Jerin Jacob <jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, "users@dpdk.org" <users@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] Project Governance and Linux Foundation
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2016 09:40:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58073195.60409@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA675F83B2@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com>
Hi,
On 10/19/2016 09:04 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim wrote:
>> From: Jerin Jacob [mailto:jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com]
>> Having said that, Does anyone see any issue in moving to LF?
>> If yes, Then we should enumerate the issues and discuss further.
>
> This is a great point. Can you explain what you see as the benefits of maintaining the current model? As far as I can see, the LF model provides everything that we currently have, plus it makes DPDK independent of any single company, and it also gives us the option of availing of other LF services if we choose to do so, including the ability to host lab infrastructure for the project, legal support for trademarks if we need that, event planning etc.
The one issue I am aware of is that the Linux Foundation, in our
previous discussions, requested that they take ownership of the dpdk.org
domain name and management of the DNS, to ensure that the website and
community infrastructure were not beholden to a single project member -
is that still an issue?
Regards,
Dave.
--
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-19 8:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-10 8:33 [dpdk-users] " O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-17 10:23 ` Hobywan Kenoby
2016-10-17 11:52 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-17 12:40 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-17 14:40 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-18 13:22 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-17 21:23 ` [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] " Dave Neary
2016-10-18 11:34 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-18 13:27 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-18 16:26 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-19 8:04 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-10-19 8:40 ` Dave Neary [this message]
2016-10-19 9:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-19 9:09 ` Jerin Jacob
2016-10-18 4:16 ` Liu Yuan
2016-10-18 10:29 ` [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] How to printout PMD logs to console yingzhi
2016-10-18 10:58 ` Kavanagh, Mark B
2016-10-18 12:51 ` [dpdk-users] [dpdk-dev] Project Governance and Linux Foundation Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-21 14:00 ` Dave Neary
2016-10-21 17:20 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-10-22 19:27 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-12 5:44 qin.chunhua
2016-10-12 7:43 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-10-13 6:10 ` Muhammad Zain-ul-Abideen
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:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=58073195.60409@redhat.com \
--to=dneary@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
--cc=tim.odriscoll@intel.com \
--cc=users@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).