From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83533A034F; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 13:49:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A0924014F; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 13:49:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-108-mta16.mxroute.com (mail-108-mta16.mxroute.com [136.175.108.16]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8533D4003E for ; Wed, 4 Aug 2021 13:49:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from filter004.mxroute.com ([149.28.56.236] filter004.mxroute.com) (Authenticated sender: mN4UYu2MZsgR) by mail-108-mta16.mxroute.com (ZoneMTA) with ESMTPSA id 17b10ff3acf00074ba.001 for (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256); Wed, 04 Aug 2021 11:49:27 +0000 X-Zone-Loop: 46b0f7259e045cd5286ff053f67eb8210ae8457c43b3 X-Originating-IP: [149.28.56.236] DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ashroe.eu; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=fWThVnH+QInXwHteBuDi/p10O8NHV5ncJApWOZRQS6w=; b=In2RWsm910CakdwC8XhqkH16Xp Mka79GZKPYQR3OJv3ACIlvJ0tRSD/tizmA3ztsyFBcLTzFRPXIJdKYN1FHXbt5YBdAUNqyI3QH1Nh 4dNLX1o8HFyb54rncRgzRNuWYgTC36B3O2gm8T6su7r0yevXIQcFuY0G1aBpmjvCycyGsvZspVNYK v096o+7GvQ+JGu5AI3PDrGKlRTpSVk/osuEv1h/3vEngkE9L0SDNY01RdsxKdFpZDqpYPMWngC4yp 28TOwgGGkYIHyb+0SK3p5/bQJ/BX9ra7mmT75XBm6tFNhHGsqo9/ICHmM+2qytpVyMpGZEdS+suYy ugHb0tmQ==; To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org, bruce.richardson@intel.com, john.mcnamara@intel.com, roretzla@linux.microsoft.com, ferruh.yigit@intel.com, david.marchand@redhat.com, stephen@networkplumber.org, jerinjacobk@gmail.com References: <20210629160031.74681-1-mdr@ashroe.eu> <20210804093431.677707-1-mdr@ashroe.eu> <2298571.ajXUNpiJai@thomas> From: "Kinsella, Ray" Message-ID: <11118c95-d65f-ad71-0d46-b627cf641b62@ashroe.eu> Date: Wed, 4 Aug 2021 12:49:23 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.12.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2298571.ajXUNpiJai@thomas> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AuthUser: mdr@ashroe.eu X-Zone-Spam-Resolution: no action X-Zone-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1, required=15, tests=[ARC_NA=0, RCPT_COUNT_SEVEN=0, FROM_HAS_DN=0, TO_DN_SOME=0, FREEMAIL_ENVRCPT=0, MIME_GOOD=-0.1, FROM_EQ_ENVFROM=0, MIME_TRACE=0, RCVD_COUNT_ZERO=0, NEURAL_SPAM=0, MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM=0] Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v5] doc: policy on the promotion of experimental APIs X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On 04/08/2021 11:39, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 04/08/2021 11:34, Ray Kinsella: >> Clarifying the ABI policy on the promotion of experimental APIS to stable. >> We have a fair number of APIs that have been experimental for more than >> 2 years. This policy amendment indicates that these APIs should be >> promoted or removed, or should at least form a conservation between the > > s/conservation/conversation/ > >> maintainer and original contributor. >> >> Signed-off-by: Ray Kinsella >> Acked-by: Tyler Retzlaff >> --- >> +#. Libraries or APIs marked as :ref:`experimental ` may be >> + changed or removed without prior notice, as they are not considered part of >> + an ABI version. The :ref:`experimental ` status of an API >> + is not an indefinite state. > [...] >> +Promotion to stable >> +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> + >> +An API's ``experimental`` status should be reviewed annually, by both the >> +maintainer and/or the original contributor. Ordinarily APIs marked as >> +``experimental`` will be promoted to the stable ABI once a maintainer has become >> +satisfied that the API is mature and is unlikely to change. >> + >> +In exceptional circumstances, should an API still be classified as >> +``experimental`` after two years and is without any prospect of becoming part of >> +the stable API. The API will then become a candidate for removal, to avoid the >> +accumulation of abandoned symbols. >> + >> +Should an API's Binary Interface change, usually due to a direct change to the > > API's Binary Interface? > I assume you mean ABI. > >> +API's signature, it is reasonable for the review and expiry clocks to reset. The >> +promotion or removal of symbols will typically form part of a conversation >> +between the maintainer and the original contributor. > > Acked-by: Thomas Monjalon > > Applied with above changes, thanks. > Thanks.