From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Olivier Matz Subject: Re: [RFC] proposal of allowing personal/project repos on DPDK.org Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2017 09:47:14 +0200 Message-ID: <20170605094714.7abe63c5@platinum> References: <20170601050730.GA5765@debian-ZGViaWFuCg> <136058706.0Fjdze3SFe@xps> <3EB4FA525960D640B5BDFFD6A3D891267BA643D3@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <20170602133758.27f5b8a1@xeon-e3> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Dumitrescu, Cristian" , Thomas Monjalon , "Bie, Tiwei" , "dev@dpdk.org" , "Richardson, Bruce" , "yuanhan.liu@linux.intel.com" , "Ananyev, Konstantin" To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f52.google.com (mail-wm0-f52.google.com [74.125.82.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A1577CE1 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2017 09:47:17 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-wm0-f52.google.com with SMTP id x70so5821603wme.0 for ; Mon, 05 Jun 2017 00:47:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20170602133758.27f5b8a1@xeon-e3> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Fri, 2 Jun 2017 13:37:58 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Fri, 2 Jun 2017 18:37:40 +0000 > "Dumitrescu, Cristian" wrote: > > > > Why? Do you need to host a repo on dpdk.org to try a new idea? > > > > > > > Prototyping new DPDK-related ideas and sharing them with DPDK > > community, with some of them likely to eventually make their way > > into DPDK once accepted and mature enough. > > > > > > > I am against adding some user repos in this list: > > > http://dpdk.org/browse/ > > > I think the list of official repos must be kept light for good > > > visibility. > > > > We could have a single project called sandbox mentioned in this > > list; whoever interested, needs to drill down into this one? > > > > > > But we can imagine a forge for users at a different location like > > > http://dpdk.org/users/ > > > However why not using another public forge for this need? > > > > Easier to share DPDK related ideas on dpdk.org rather than other > > places. > > Let's not distract Thomas and others with lots of effort to run > servers. Having dpdk.org be the server for development and stable > should be more than enough. > > Running a secure server for user repositories is hard. If you want an > example, look follow some of the two factor auth stuff being done at > kernel.org. > > Another option would be to have an official clone of dpdk.org on > github and let users do what they need to there. This keeps project > out of the forge business. > +1 I'm not convinced about why having those repos hosted at a place or another would help to share ideas. It will generates a long list of obsolete directories. For instance, in my opinon, the repo list on kernel.org brings more noise than useful info: https://git.kernel.org/ As Stephen said, administrating these new repos/ml/patchwork/... would imply a maintenance work (Thomas), knowing there are plenty other ways to have a public git repo. Instead, what about adding a link on dpdk.org website that would point to a place for dpdk.org related projects on github/gitlab/... This could be either to a public forge, or to a dedicated server administrated by people that needs this feature, avoiding another work load for Thomas ;) Olivier