From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-f49.google.com (mail-wg0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE4A9A8F for ; Tue, 19 May 2015 17:45:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: by wgfl8 with SMTP id l8so22923454wgf.2 for ; Tue, 19 May 2015 08:45:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:organization :user-agent:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=0VWd2XpwBTKosje4MSCX7gf1QxFzBEFi6eH9IvnfV0U=; b=VtQUY4IzeatGwy2gBonsvqN/r3SbtQ1ibWWK88tIB06qAbeFjvyu7f6RssZ/6d5ol3 XJHqmywllJqMjZo1ta8aO0i0Q1Dzy02oXmNIdVHjqNXDkfPCc9Te5RHrhjXkMDutP6QF xTY+iRfMmvz5y2B17pZPmpEFRChOFWVqrJQiFlw+X0hMBHPXvpXv+fp/S6iFe3hEkAGG KW4fJJAfvAhubFxKwCzeqWCcYoUd9/RQK94ZlM5JYP6klAGPc+BNLIu4ax1o1LeXUqQi steG0o4nuCXlZgEcpG9Dq98RneKonhBtAED93Y9+1E/3Q39smJ/B0VJk2XLlCrKkt+Z5 8t0A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlgGS42VzeNYacN5ZIh9eCYNBAegixcTYzGvXG1nlXYhBNjfkSoBfn04n09zBW0BWfmCBk9 X-Received: by 10.180.81.200 with SMTP id c8mr32132488wiy.49.1432050350501; Tue, 19 May 2015 08:45:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from xps13.localnet ([62.159.77.186]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ei8sm22361937wjd.32.2015.05.19.08.45.48 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 19 May 2015 08:45:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Thomas Monjalon To: dev@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 17:45:05 +0200 Message-ID: <6422303.qpQUJvDa9r@xps13> Organization: 6WIND User-Agent: KMail/4.14.7 (Linux/4.0.1-1-ARCH; KDE/4.14.7; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <20150519153434.GA29078@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA54D43080@IRSMSX102.ger.corp.intel.com> <20150519153434.GA29078@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Technical Steering Committee (TSC) 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: Tue, 19 May 2015 15:45:50 -0000 2015-05-19 11:34, Neil Horman: > On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 07:43:14AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > > Composition of the TSC should reflect contributions to the project, but be > > > balanced so that no single party has an undue influence. It should also be > > > kept to a manageable size(maybe 7?). > > > > > > The TSC should elect its own chair, who would have the deciding vote in > > > the event that the TSC was deadlocked. Once in place, the TSC should > > > approve any new members. > > > > > > Specific details on membership can be discussed and agreed later, if we > > > agree on the creation of a TSC. > > > > TSC should be limited to those individuals and companies that have > > contributed in a non-trivial way to the DPDK distributed code base. > > It should not be a users group, or place for network vendors who take but > > never give back. > > > +1 > > It should also endavour to only act as a fallback body for any issues commonly > handled by the development communtiy (patch acceptance/review, etc) I agree that it should be a fallback. And I'm wondering how useful it would be: have we ever known such discussion or conflict without finding a solution or a consensus? By the way, is there a TSC in Linux netdev?