From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-f170.google.com (mail-qk0-f170.google.com [209.85.220.170]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5237BCC62 for ; Sat, 2 May 2015 14:38:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: by qkgx75 with SMTP id x75so63620059qkg.1 for ; Sat, 02 May 2015 05:38:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:reply-to:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=l8iR28bfLxU7ywGdDwRI116ENwtoeWQHHjTuolffzoI=; b=vBIjChlkbhscxhsj68Y9z0LaQYBWxqoCn2AqtWfNjzE/fMxIsd9DWqPyW4LdJ6x+WI z/BcIB5cJB2gxRmpic+oOtMOr0vvufulCmexCtJyO2TQZZ1nTs+Rvzi3Wm/s7V0hqjIH LBL6/2NZnCactwgKBj74cxWlK3vXYBU1b7o5o+0YCq7m8SmtP9sogDLYdO8FcWpL1kB4 yS06b2HIqrzq0fphgdw5zLskQ3Wo+/6yFoa4WOIY9GbAbnxSt4PVUoSBHYX97+jsEZlY ijidh8Dea9rMq1MiLyCAZArjXlzNjOT7p5hmOyWcQexQhs/LRX07Z/lL46Q5KLXv1y/H IJAA== X-Received: by 10.55.21.87 with SMTP id f84mr28682027qkh.50.1430570280770; Sat, 02 May 2015 05:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tfherb.local (pool-72-84-233-168.rcmdva.fios.verizon.net. [72.84.233.168]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 34sm5436942qky.7.2015.05.02.05.37.59 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 02 May 2015 05:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <5544C527.6050109@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 02 May 2015 08:37:59 -0400 From: Thomas F Herbert User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Neil Horman , Matthew Hall References: <20150501110914.182dcfb1@urahara> <20150501194951.GA25199@mhcomputing.net> <20150501195932.GD595@fuloong-minipc.musicnaut.iki.fi> <20150501203658.GA26543@mhcomputing.net> <20150502114059.GB28845@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> In-Reply-To: <20150502114059.GB28845@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , therbert@redhat.com, Aaro Koskinen Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] GitHub sandbox for the DPDK community X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: thomasfherbert@gmail.com List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 May 2015 12:38:01 -0000 On 5/2/15 7:40 AM, Neil Horman wrote: > On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Matthew Hall wrote: >> On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 10:59:32PM +0300, Aaro Koskinen wrote: >>> Projects like GCC, GLIBC, binutils, busybox, etc or what? >>> >>> A. >> You'll notice all of these are low-level UNIX hacker sorts of tools mostly, >> with the partial exception of busybox. But even that is mainly for embedded >> use. It doesn't mean I don't think they're good and useful, but it does limit >> the possible size of the community in my view. >> >> Since we are talking about how to get the largest widest community possible >> for DPDK, it could require doing things a bit differently from how many >> low-level tools have historically done things. A look at gmane, http://dir.gmane.org/gmane.comp.networking.dpdk.devel, confirms the explosion of interest in DPDK in the last 6 months with postings up to almost 70/day. There is no problem with lack of interest in DPDK nor is there a need to change the mechanics of hosting the source to widen the audience. The case for DPDK is really compelling, the idea for reducing the HW complexity by accelerating switch functions on commodity HW is a fantastic benefit. Easily integrated accelerated programmable switch functions is a great advantage as well. I do think there may be an argument for increasing the number of reviewers/maintainers or subdivide according to ares of interest perhaps into 4 categories: 1. PMD drivers 2. librte core 3. applications 4. vhost --TFH >> > Why? > > Contributors to GCC: ~600 (based on svn) review > Contrubutors to glibc : ~300 (based on git) review > Contributors to binutils: ~600 > Contributors to busybox: ~300 > > Contributors to DPDK: ~125 > > Now I grant you that dpdk is a newer, much more niche project, but its > disingenuous to state that we _have_ to do things differently to reach a wider > audience. We can, but its by no means a prerequisite to gainining a wider > audience. > -- Thomas F. Herbert