[dpdk-dev] next techboard meeting 2018-02-14

[dpdk-dev] next techboard meeting 2018-02-14

[Olivier Matz]

Hi,

The next Technical Board meeting will happen on IRC freenode #dpdk-board
this wednesday 14 february 3pm UTC.

You will find links to the agenda and previous meetings on this page:
    http://dpdk.org/dev/techboard-minutes
The last one is not yet on the website:
    http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-February/090698.html

Please send on any items requiring techboard attention.

Thanks,
Olivier

Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] next techboard meeting 2018-02-14

[Thomas Monjalon]

13/02/2018 11:37, Olivier Matz:
> Please send on any items requiring techboard attention.

If some deprecation notices require some special attention, we should
discuss them in the techboard meeting, just before closing the release.
The most obvious deprecations will be accepted before the meeting.
We can review the remaining ones.

Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-techboard] next techboard meeting 2018-02-14

[Ferruh Yigit]

On 2/13/2018 10:37 AM, Olivier Matz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The next Technical Board meeting will happen on IRC freenode #dpdk-board
> this wednesday 14 february 3pm UTC.
> 
> You will find links to the agenda and previous meetings on this page:
>     http://dpdk.org/dev/techboard-minutes
> The last one is not yet on the website:
>     http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2018-February/090698.html
> 
> Please send on any items requiring techboard attention.

Can we discuss following process patch:
https://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/patch/33250/

Mainly the issue is how to approach a patch that effects other parts of the
DPDK, who should update those dependent parts, the initiator of the feature or
the maintainer of those parts?

Two opposed arguments on issue:
- If initiator doesn't fix the dependent code, somebody needs to follow the
dependent parts to do the work, which is a maintenance cost keep growing by time.

- If initiator has to do the all work, this is too much work for initiator and
may prevent improvements because of too much work, or because of missing
knowledge in dependent parts.


Thanks,
ferruh

> 
> Thanks,
> Olivier
>