Re: DPDK namespace

[Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com>]

Hi,

On 04/06/2016 08:07 AM, Panu Matilainen wrote:
>> +1: it's a bit weird to keep both, especially for a long while, that
>> every time we turn a rte_ prefix to dpdk_ prefix, we break applications.
>> Instead of breaking applications many times, I'd prefer to break once.
>> Therefore, applications could do a simple global rte_ -> dpdk_
>> substitute:
>> it doesn't sound that painful then.
> 
> I concur. If (and I think that should be a pretty big IF) the prefix is
> to be changed then its better done in one fast sweep than gradually.
> 
> Gratuitious (or nearly so) change is always extremely annoying, and the
> longer it takes the more painful it is. Application developers wont much
> care what the prefix is as long as its consistent, but if they're forced
> to track prefix changes across several releases with different libraries
> moving at different pace, they WILL be calling for bloody murder :)

How about the idea of creating (at switch over time) an optionally
installable dpdk_compat package that just has a list of #defines for the
old symbols pointing them at the new symbols? That would also allow
people with old applications to update DPDK without having to modify
their applications.

Thanks,
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