From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: Architecture Board Proposal Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:25:05 +0100 Message-ID: <5157985.jDBArynuku@xps13> References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA674488A2@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <56336C69.5000405@redhat.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67449C7B@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: "O'Driscoll, Tim" , Dave Neary Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f49.google.com (mail-wm0-f49.google.com [74.125.82.49]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 721528E91 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:26:16 +0100 (CET) Received: by wmeg8 with SMTP id g8so11865687wme.0 for ; Fri, 30 Oct 2015 06:26:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA67449C7B@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2015-10-30 13:23, O'Driscoll, Tim: > From: Dave Neary > > There was a general agreement in Dublin that DPDK related projects and > > applications could live in dpdk.org, but we didn't really touch on the > > process or requirements for adding new projects. I think it's > > appropriate for the architecture board to own those too. > > That makes sense. So maybe what we're converging on is the following: > - The scope of the Architecture Board covers all projects hosted on dpdk.org. > - The Architecture Board will approve new projects to be hosted on dpdk.org. > - If it's not clear whether a new piece of functionality resides within one of the existing projects on dpdk.org or needs a new project of its own, the Architecture Board will decide. > > Is that in line with your thoughts on this? Do we need a board to define the scope of this board? ;) The only reason I see to reject a project, would be to consider that the project is not related to DPDK enough. I think it will be an obvious decision. So it shouldn't be a high responsibility nor a high workload to add to this board. But clearly, the hosted projects (except DPDK itself) should not be impacted by the DPDK board.