From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <dneary@redhat.com> Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DE5A924E for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 16:17:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02B2C8E706; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:17:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-41-137.bos.redhat.com (ovpn-113-77.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.77]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id t9UFHHZ0003981 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:17:18 -0400 To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>, "O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com> References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA674488A2@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <56336C69.5000405@redhat.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67449C7B@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <5157985.jDBArynuku@xps13> From: Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com> Message-ID: <563389FD.30407@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:17:17 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5157985.jDBArynuku@xps13> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.22 Cc: dev@dpdk.org Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Architecture Board Proposal X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/> List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org> List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>, <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 15:17:19 -0000 On 10/30/2015 09:25 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > 2015-10-30 13:23, O'Driscoll, Tim: >> From: Dave Neary >>> There was a general agreement in Dublin that DPDK related projects and >>> applications could live in dpdk.org, but we didn't really touch on the >>> process or requirements for adding new projects. I think it's >>> appropriate for the architecture board to own those too. >> >> That makes sense. So maybe what we're converging on is the following: >> - The scope of the Architecture Board covers all projects hosted on dpdk.org. >> - The Architecture Board will approve new projects to be hosted on dpdk.org. >> - If it's not clear whether a new piece of functionality resides within one of the existing projects on dpdk.org or needs a new project of its own, the Architecture Board will decide. >> >> Is that in line with your thoughts on this? > > Do we need a board to define the scope of this board? ;) :-) > The only reason I see to reject a project, would be to consider that the > project is not related to DPDK enough. I think it will be an obvious decision. > So it shouldn't be a high responsibility nor a high workload to add to this > board. > But clearly, the hosted projects (except DPDK itself) should not be impacted > by the DPDK board. You have a good point - and in the spirit of "the board exists only to make decisions that aren't converging in the community", maybe we don't need more. 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