From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Horman Subject: Re: Making DPDK.org more vendor neutral Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2015 16:55:11 -0500 Message-ID: <20150131215511.GA28666@localhost.localdomain> References: <20150131204710.2bf9f5fa@uryu.home.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: dev-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150131204710.2bf9f5fa-CA4OZQ/Yy2Lykuyl+CZolw@public.gmane.org> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces-VfR2kkLFssw@public.gmane.org Sender: "dev" On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 08:47:10PM +0000, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > I think that DPDK.org should be as neutral in all public communications. > > This bothers me: > "If you need some specific drivers or networking stacks, you should contact a company that provides such extensions." > > This tag line is a link to page describing 6wind and other vendors leaves a biased taint > on the initial impression. It would be best to only put in historical data > about the contributing companies and a vague reference to commercial support being > available. > > It is not like kernel.org has links to SUSE and RHEL. We need to make DPDK.org > independent. > I agree. Aspirations to greater neutrality can do nothing but bring in additional developers. Neil