[dpdk-dev] Proposals from project governance meeting at DPDK Userspace (was Notes from ...)

Stephen Hemminger stephen at networkplumber.org
Wed Nov 4 00:35:30 CET 2015


On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:16:16 -0800
Pradeep Kathail <pkathail at cisco.com> wrote:

> Tim and Dave,
> 
> I agree that an architecture board membership should be based on 
> technical standing and contribution but at the same time,
> if you are trying to bring a new hardware paradigm into a project, you 
> need to give a chance to some of those experts to
> participate and gain the standing.
> 
> If community is serious about supporting SOC's, my suggestion will be 
> to allow few (2?) members from SOC community for
> limited time (6? months) and then evaluate based on their contributions.
> 
> Pradeep

Why doesn't one or more SOC vendors contribute patches or discuss
the issues on the mailing list or at DPDK meetings. I dont think we
need a behind closed doors planning session on this. Much prefer
the old "consensus and running code model".


More information about the dev mailing list