From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga07.intel.com (mga07.intel.com [134.134.136.100]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 518122934; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 10:33:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga105.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2016 01:33:21 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,471,1473145200"; d="scan'208";a="888428812" Received: from irsmsx102.ger.corp.intel.com ([163.33.3.155]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2016 01:33:20 -0700 Received: from irsmsx108.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.11.164]) by IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com ([169.254.2.198]) with mapi id 14.03.0248.002; Mon, 10 Oct 2016 09:33:18 +0100 From: "O'Driscoll, Tim" To: "dev@dpdk.org" , "users@dpdk.org" Thread-Topic: Project Governance and Linux Foundation Thread-Index: AdIi0Am9XkA5c/YfTUiuKkI+LzQJyg== Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 08:33:18 +0000 Message-ID: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA675F0B5A@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Accept-Language: en-IE, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-titus-metadata-40: eyJDYXRlZ29yeUxhYmVscyI6IiIsIk1ldGFkYXRhIjp7Im5zIjoiaHR0cDpcL1wvd3d3LnRpdHVzLmNvbVwvbnNcL0ludGVsMyIsImlkIjoiZDU0YjVkZTQtYTVkYS00MjIyLWFhZTAtMmYzNGE1NjlhZGU5IiwicHJvcHMiOlt7Im4iOiJDVFBDbGFzc2lmaWNhdGlvbiIsInZhbHMiOlt7InZhbHVlIjoiQ1RQX0lDIn1dfV19LCJTdWJqZWN0TGFiZWxzIjpbXSwiVE1DVmVyc2lvbiI6IjE1LjkuNi42IiwiVHJ1c3RlZExhYmVsSGFzaCI6IkloK1kwQUdaN2tycHd2T1JzS3N3TVFmZjBVbXVtd1BLWUR5VE1qMENqNWc9In0= x-ctpclassification: CTP_IC x-originating-ip: [163.33.239.181] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: [dpdk-dev] Project Governance and Linux Foundation X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 08:33:23 -0000 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. 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). - 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). June 2016: - The Open vSwitch project proposed moving to the Linux Foundation (http://= openvswitch.org/pipermail/discuss/2016-June/021761.html). 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).