From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
To: Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Beyond DPDK 2.0
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 09:41:14 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150427134114.GC17179@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <553E2DD8.6080908@redhat.com>
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 08:38:48AM -0400, Dave Neary wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 04/26/2015 05:56 PM, Neil Horman wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 04:08:23PM +0000, Wiles, Keith wrote:
> >> I would like to see some type of layering process to allow patches to be
> >> applied in a timely manner a few weeks not months or completely ignored.
> >> Maybe some type of voting is reasonable, but we need to do something to
> >> turn around the patches in clean reasonable manner.
> >>
> >> Think we need some type of group meeting every week to look at the patches
> >> and determining which ones get applied, this gives quick feedback to the
> >> submitter as to the status of the patch.
> >>
> > I think a group meeting is going to be way too much overhead to manage properly.
> > You'll get different people every week with agenda that may not line up with
> > code quality, which is really what the review is meant to provide. I think
> > perhaps a better approach would be to require that that code owners from the
> > maintainer file provide and ACK/NAK on their patches within 3-4 days, and
> > require a corresponding tree maintainer to apply the patch within 7 or so. That
> > would cap our patch latency. Likewise, if a patch slips in creating a
> > regression, the author needs to be alerted and given a time window in which to
> > fix the problem before the offending patch is reverted during the QE cycle.
>
> What Keith is describing is very similar to a change management/change
> control board you might find for production/IT processes:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Change_control_board
>
> An efficient change management board approves "low overhead" changes
> automatically/very quickly, and focusses on the 10% of changes which
> could be disruptive (and what disruptive means changes from one
> environment to another) - for code it would be any patches that
> potentially conflict, anything that could cause regressions, add
> instability or uncertainty, and any feature which can be implemented
> multiple ways.
>
> Not saying this would work - I have never seen an open source project
> implement a change management process for handling patches, and
> instinctively I agree with you Neil that it would be a lot of overhead,
> but it's an interesting thought exercise to think how it might work.
>
I take you're meaning Dave, and it is an interesting thought experiment. how
would such a change control board mesh with a public review list however? That
is to say, would such a voting board not insulate decision makers from community
participation? Perhaps I'm mistaken there, but it seems like allowing a small
group of maintainers make acceptance decisions in a private meeting would
insulate them from individual accountability on a list.
Neil
> Thanks,
> 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:[~2015-04-27 13:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-04-16 10:38 O'Driscoll, Tim
2015-04-22 15:11 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2015-04-22 15:33 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-04-23 11:36 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2015-04-24 21:02 ` Dave Neary
2015-05-07 14:02 ` Avi Kivity
2015-05-07 14:34 ` Ivan Boule
2015-05-07 15:27 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-05-07 15:33 ` Avi Kivity
2015-05-07 15:33 ` Avi Kivity
2015-05-07 15:49 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-05-07 16:05 ` Avi Kivity
2015-05-08 4:16 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-05-08 5:29 ` Luke Gorrie
2015-05-08 9:06 ` Bruce Richardson
2015-05-08 9:32 ` Luke Gorrie
2015-05-08 9:42 ` Bruce Richardson
2015-05-08 10:02 ` Luke Gorrie
2015-05-08 14:44 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-05-08 16:16 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-05-08 10:26 ` Hobywan Kenoby
2015-05-08 13:31 ` Neil Horman
2015-05-08 16:22 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-05-07 15:34 ` Luke Gorrie
2015-05-08 4:31 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-04-24 7:47 ` Luke Gorrie
2015-04-24 15:29 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2015-04-24 17:00 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-26 9:07 ` Luke Gorrie
2015-04-24 17:39 ` Jay Rolette
2015-04-24 17:51 ` Matthew Hall
2015-04-25 13:30 ` Marc Sune
2015-04-25 16:08 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-04-26 21:56 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-27 2:29 ` Jim Thompson
2015-04-27 13:07 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-27 16:07 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-04-28 7:20 ` Dor Laor
[not found] ` <D162FA4E.1DED8%keith.wiles@intel.com>
2015-04-27 9:52 ` Marc Sune
2015-04-27 13:39 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-04-27 15:34 ` Marc Sune
2015-04-27 10:29 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-27 13:50 ` Wiles, Keith
2015-04-27 15:23 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-27 12:38 ` Dave Neary
2015-04-27 13:41 ` Neil Horman [this message]
2015-04-27 16:09 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-04-24 18:12 ` Matt Laswell
2015-04-24 18:51 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-24 19:55 ` Jay Rolette
2015-04-25 12:10 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-27 13:46 ` Jay Rolette
2015-04-28 17:26 ` Neil Horman
2015-04-28 20:02 ` Jay Rolette
2015-04-28 6:22 ` Matthew Hall
2015-04-28 17:48 ` Stephen Hemminger
2015-04-30 21:31 Wiles, Keith
2015-04-30 21:38 ` Wiles, Keith
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=20150427134114.GC17179@hmsreliant.think-freely.org \
--to=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=dneary@redhat.com \
/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).