[dpdk-dev] [PATCH v1] doc: process for new library approval in principle

[jerinj at marvell.com]

From: Jerin Jacob <jerinj at marvell.com>

Based on techboard meeting[1] action item, defining the process for a
new library approval in principle.

[1]
https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2023-January/260035.html

Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob <jerinj at marvell.com>
---
RFC..v1:
- Fix the review comments by Konstantin, Keven, Thomas at
http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230213092616.3589932-1-jerinj@marvell.com/

 doc/guides/contributing/index.rst       |  1 +
 doc/guides/contributing/new_library.rst | 48 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 49 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 doc/guides/contributing/new_library.rst

diff --git a/doc/guides/contributing/index.rst b/doc/guides/contributing/index.rst
index 7a9e6b368e..ef627329f1 100644
--- a/doc/guides/contributing/index.rst
+++ b/doc/guides/contributing/index.rst
@@ -18,3 +18,4 @@ Contributor's Guidelines
     vulnerability
     stable
     cheatsheet
+    new_library
diff --git a/doc/guides/contributing/new_library.rst b/doc/guides/contributing/new_library.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..7dde8cbe64
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/guides/contributing/new_library.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
+   Copyright(c) 2023 Marvell.
+
+Process for new library approval in principle
+=============================================
+
+Rationale
+---------
+
+Adding a new library to DPDK with proper RFC and then full patch-sets is significant work.
+In order to save effort, developers will get an early approval in principle, or early feedback in
+case the library is not suitable for various reasons.
+
+Process
+-------
+
+#. When a contributor would like to add a new library to DPDK code base, the contributor must send
+   the following items to DPDK mailing list for technical board approval-in-principle.
+
+   * Purpose of the library.
+   * Scope of work: outline the various additional tasks planned for this library, such as
+     developing new test applications, adding new drivers, and updating existing applications.
+   * Expected usage models of the library.
+   * Any licensing constraints.
+   * Justification for adding to DPDK.
+   * Any other implementations of the same functionality in other libraries/projects and how this
+     version differs.
+   * Public API specification header file as RFC.
+
+       * Optional and good to have.
+       * Technical board may additionally request this collateral if needed to get more clarity
+         on scope and purpose.
+   * Any new library dependencies to DPDK.
+
+#. Technical board to schedule discussion on this in upcoming technical board meeting along with
+   author. Based on the technical board schedule and/or author availability, technical board may
+   need a maximum of **five** technical board meeting slots.
+
+#. Based on mailing list and technical board meeting discussions, technical board to vote and share
+   the decision in the mailing list. The decision outcome can be any of the following.
+
+   * Approved in principal
+   * Not approved
+   * Further information needed
+
+#. Once technical board approves the library in principle, it is safe to start working on the
+   implementation. However, the patches will need to meet the usual quality criteria in order to be
+   effectively accepted.
-- 
2.40.1