From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from COL004-OMC1S12.hotmail.com (col004-omc1s12.hotmail.com [65.55.34.22]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C56E4AC7; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 12:23:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EUR01-DB5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([65.55.34.7]) by COL004-OMC1S12.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Mon, 17 Oct 2016 03:23:59 -0700 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=FUFwwSvqMsOS7zoP6a1odMzv5AQkBav0t4tZ9Q8IAB8=; b=O9fcdFyLOtAISjM5s5tr+4H6pc5dAJeSiBdzCrt2FgSHafNsuBvCiP+hKCJyUWtg7iApdNjdlqCv/+eWLbaGpQ6swNkwZy8YVpm59GL1AsKPBHOBrmi+QemfgBJmQrrQTs79MjX/hpNrhxFJsIWQdHpd9oHez6//yl3z1jBTd6vLmC7VAtj5mmhdsrcAYz7AgcAVIpxyIM1y/XpM95d7YxFD+1p6/YCCdOBvC67Eog5ISNGlRmT2B++8xiSuCrCvA3Ji/w7nB2oS3CTqFmXPfYlXpmJqzYru0ysHpa0tFxcAVJZ0pGu1rbvl59qPgCGb6kU9rreP5p08aldHqitVjw== Received: from HE1EUR01FT048.eop-EUR01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.0.55) by HE1EUR01HT128.eop-EUR01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.1.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.629.5; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:23:56 +0000 Received: from DB5PR06MB1686.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.152.0.57) by HE1EUR01FT048.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.1.17) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.669.7 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:23:50 +0000 Received: from DB5PR06MB1686.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.165.213.8]) by DB5PR06MB1686.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.165.213.8]) with mapi id 15.01.0669.018; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:23:49 +0000 From: Hobywan Kenoby To: "O'Driscoll, Tim" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "users@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: Project Governance and Linux Foundation Thread-Index: AdIi0Am9XkA5c/YfTUiuKkI+LzQJygFj5VmU Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:23:49 +0000 Message-ID: References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA675F0B5A@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA675F0B5A@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: authentication-results: intel.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;intel.com; dmarc=none action=none header.from=hotmail.com; x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-tmn: [/PbNDxT4zi6O+KVi4WSQBMImjEqSmJkf] x-eopattributedmessage: 0 x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; HE1EUR01HT128; 6:yrD8UH0ZnwsxOFNqW7+4HGODfdKRSQBsK3onJsMFVBaKpf84KQ+vE6pRGpGZOvQYByoLypdO4QHYGZ9+Y6BbKoPWHx1Egs/BYk2BwySM+1ibOjorhgB4CP2GXDKSfLaWi3oz6WSbayyoi8YdxpTzPen/5LZo8trYW2B8p9ifX0lV30nvMntf/fJjzmBEJWVjalvmW47gqckwkGXTePsDF1UrQyVdPt8AKC0kmby5F8UfrHy1Ds0vbtQ0fu3/90WLexz34AMLMNbXd6bXdvR8+sIBmpF7RRUto38SFiw5gE8=; 5:fFcbMhvicX0sjAw2JPeetX4XFpdFKmQnsxa2FnLseMOTRozCgegTFRXYjyq5mAXhvDB8CCM4CaZBHoP28O/vyFKgd4U7KOf8EOeFchlq5xhu7+Hx1r5WG38kbrAUvBmxJENYNzwRr8j6LzrsoYBrPA==; 24:jZQHon41hiqHbWiDi9/aohyA0GhniiD5yi0YeYQdnX90rxcx9dwDdx969l9zjLajMr3zinXL75cMZLcMDJAlUZK51oDSTKNqNPT3fmfSxjk=; 7:oWRS46GhqOuimHOfyHUp8FBzDnr1CkAtitEbik9w6I8n73DhzJclaFtOx4ldjtC04gpty01QjV22gaw7lMYEAyhVW79n0hcv+6otK+XLKB8Fm2kuhfd6EkJWC7co8htQw+E9X+0Ef0cvy9DqDlsoT4+dLDN0oyBK9GEpNnCOuqLJXBSDvLetK/nyDl7vjomBLjzR4ZFxqpeQ9ZBl7xMUZWRCETcJGXdWa7YGY8uexXHYzCKr1Zp3Pw3wRaARRkSbPAxvBtHY8w++wTLwfBjSPJDz7rUQ1RVhxLRw9o4rv4KxBjv3SmPpuqVR0qcA7Jo2ECR/ExZTE5pZeyB5vmx1xQ== x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(98900003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:HE1EUR01HT128; H:DB5PR06MB1686.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 34d978d1-d114-4197-06b8-08d3f677af5c x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(1601124038)(1603103081)(1601125047); SRVR:HE1EUR01HT128; x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(432015012)(82015046); SRVR:HE1EUR01HT128; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:; SRVR:HE1EUR01HT128; x-forefront-prvs: 0098BA6C6C spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 Oct 2016 10:23:49.0594 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1EUR01HT128 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 17 Oct 2016 10:23:59.0316 (UTC) FILETIME=[92DE0140:01D22860] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15 Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Project Governance and Linux Foundation X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 10:24:01 -0000 Hi Tim, The Linux kernel community has a governance close to DPDK. It did allow companies to grow largebusinesses and indivuals to take an active and even influencial roles based on their technical expertise and merits. I don't really understand what can be gained by moving to Linux Foundation, but I am almost sure that no individual expert will be able to take any leaderhip role as those roles will be fulfilled by Platinum, Gold or Silver members: right ? VPP is a virtual switch that has its own event model that may compete with = the new model proposed by Intel, Cavium and NXP. What would be the acceptab= ility of such a proposal if DPDK would have been folded into FD.IO? Intellectual property is probably properly handled in this community (I don't really know a lot about this): are there things to be done on DPDK to match was proved to be sufficient in Linux kernel? The current DPDK version can run on virtually all processors (Intel, IBM and ARM) and leverage all NICs: is there **really** anyone questionning openness of the community? - HK ________________________________ From: dev on behalf of O'Driscoll, Tim Sent: Monday, October 10, 2016 10:33 AM To: dev@dpdk.org; users@dpdk.org Subject: [dpdk-dev] Project Governance and Linux Foundation This email is being sent on behalf of: Cavium, Cisco, Intel, NXP & Red Hat. Since its creation as an open source project in 2013, DPDK has grown signif= icantly. The number of DPDK users, contributors, commercial products that u= se DPDK and open source projects that depend on it have all increased consi= stently over that time. DPDK is now a key ingredient in networking and NFV,= and we need to ensure that the project structure and governance are approp= riate for such a critical project, and that they facilitate the project's c= ontinued growth. For over a year now we've been discussing moving DPDK to the Linux Foundati= on. We believe it's now time to conclude that discussion and make the move.= The benefits of doing this would include: - The infrastructure for a project like DPDK should not be owned and contro= lled by any single company. - Remove any remaining perception that DPDK is not truly open. - Allow the project to avail of the infrastructure and services provided by= the Linux Foundation. These include things like: Ability to host infrastru= cture for integration and testing (the FD.io CSIT lab is an example of this= - see https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/CSIT_LF_testbed); Support for legal iss= ues including trademarks and branding, and the ability to sign agreements o= n behalf of the project; Ability to pool resources for events and brand pro= motion; Safe haven for community IP resources. CSIT/CSIT LF testbed - fd.io wiki.fd.io FD.IO CSIT testbed - Server HW Configuration. CSIT testbed contains followi= ng three HW configuration types of UCS x86 servers, across total of ten ser= vers provided: We don't propose to debate the details here. Instead, an open discussion se= ssion on DPDK Project Growth has been included in the agenda for the DPDK S= ummit Userspace 2016 event in Dublin. We propose using that session to agre= e that the DPDK project will move to the Linux Foundation, and then to move= on to discussing the specifics. Things that we'll need to consider include= : - Whether DPDK moves to the Linux Foundation as an independent project or a= s part of a larger project like FD.io. - Creation of a project charter similar to those created for FD.io (https:/= /fd.io/governance/technical-community-charter) and Open vSwitch (see http:/= /openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20160619/5a2df53e/attachment= -0001.pdf). [https://fd.io/sites/cpstandard/files/theme/backgrounds/bg.jpg] Technical Community Charter | FD.io fd.io 3.3.4 Project Reviews. For each review, there will be a publicly visible wi= ki/web template filled out containing relevant review information. The revi= ew document must ... - Agreement on budget, membership levels etc. A draft budget was created by= the LF during previous discussions (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d= /1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=3D302618256), but it= is possible to adopt an even more lightweight model. We could look at alternatives to the Linux Foundation, but a) we've been ta= lking to the LF for over a year now, and b) the preponderance of networking= projects in LF, like ODL, FD.io, and OVS, makes it a natural destination f= or DPDK. As highlighted in previous discussions on this topic, it's important to str= ess that the intent is not to make significant changes to the technical gov= ernance and decision making of the project. The project has a strong set of= maintainers and a Technical Board in place already. What's required is to = supplement that with an open governance structure taking advantage of the s= ervices offered by the Linux Foundation. The purpose of this email is to outline what we want to achieve during that= discussion session in Dublin, and to allow people to consider the issue an= d prepare in advance. If people want to comment via email on the mailing li= st, that's obviously fine, but we believe that an open and frank discussion= when people meet in person in Dublin is the best way to progress this. For reference, below is a brief history of the previous discussions on this= topic: September 2015: - A DPDK community call was held to discuss project growth and possible imp= rovements. This was the first public discussion on possible governance chan= ges. The agreed next step was to discuss this in more detail at the 2015 DP= DK Summit Userspace event Dublin. Minutes of the call are at: http://dpdk.o= rg/ml/archives/dev/2015-September/024120.html. October 2015: - An open discussion session on project governance was held at the 2015 DPD= K Summit Userspace event. For technical governance, we agreed to investigat= e creating a technical steering committee. For non-technical governance (in= cluding things like event planning, legal and trademark issues, hosting of = the website etc.), we agreed to work with the Linux Foundation on a proposa= l for a lightweight governance model for DPDK. Minutes of the discussion ar= e at: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/024825.html. - The proposal for a technical steering committee was subsequently discusse= d on the mailing list (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-October/026598.= html) and agreed, leading to the creation of the DPDK Technical Board (http= ://dpdk.org/dev#board). December 2015: - A community call was held to discuss migration to the Linux Foundation. M= ike Dolan (VP of Strategic Programs at The Linux Foundation) gave an overvi= ew of the LF and the services they can provide. We agreed to form a small s= ub-team (Dave Neary, Thomas Monjalon, Stephen Hemminger, Tim O'Driscoll) to= work with the LF on a more detailed proposal. Minutes of the call are at: = http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2015-December/030532.html. February 2016: - A community call was held to discuss the LF budget proposal (see https://= docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg= /edit#gid=3D302618256). We agreed to discuss this further on the dev mailin= g list due to limited attendance on the call. Minutes of the call are at: h= ttp://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/032720.html. - A request was made on the dev and announce mailing lists too determine wh= o supported the proposal to move to the Linux Foundation (http://dpdk.org/m= l/archives/dev/2016-February/033192.html). There was public support from In= tel (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033297.html) and Brocade= (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-February/033359.html). 6WIND request= ed postponing the move for a few months (http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/20= 16-February/033299.html). - The Fast Data (FD.io) project was established under the Linux Foundation = (https://fd.io/news/announcement/2016/02/linux-foundation-forms-open-source= -effort-advance-io-services). [https://fd.io/sites/cpstandard/files/theme/backgrounds/bg.jpg] The Linux Foundation Forms Open Source Effort to Advance ... fd.io Industry leaders unite for Fast Data (FD.io) Project; aims to establish a h= igh-performance IO services framework for dynamic computing environments June 2016: - The Open vSwitch project proposed moving to the Linux Foundation (http://= openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-June/021761.html). [ovs-discuss] Request for comments on Open vSwitch joining ... openvswitch.org Since roughly October, some of the OVS committers have been talking over th= e idea of bringing Open vSwitch into a foundation. Originally the group dis= cussing the idea ... August 2016: - The Open vSwitch project moved to the Linux Foundation (https://www.linux= foundation.org/announcements/open-vswitch-joins-linux-foundation-open-netwo= rking-ecosystem). Open vSwitch Joins Linux Foundation Open Networking ... www.linuxfoundation.org SAN FRANCISCO - AUGUST 09, 2016 - The Linux Foundation, the nonprofit advan= cing professional open source management for mass collaboration today is an= nouncing ...