From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Project Governance and Linux Foundation Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:40:45 +0200 Message-ID: <56798548.UUDuXfq43Z@xps13> References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA675F0B5A@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA675F6F33@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: "O'Driscoll, Tim" , Hobywan Kenoby To: users@dpdk.org, dev@dpdk.org Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f52.google.com (mail-lf0-f52.google.com [209.85.215.52]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 55D8B5686 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 14:40:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-lf0-f52.google.com with SMTP id l131so241211223lfl.2 for ; Mon, 17 Oct 2016 05:40:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA675F6F33@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" 2016-10-17 11:52, O'Driscoll, Tim: > From: Hobywan Kenoby > > The current DPDK version can run on virtually all processors (Intel, IBM > > and ARM) and leverage all NICs: is there **really** anyone questionning > > openness of the community? > > I still hear concerns on this, and based on discussions with others who > put their names to the post below, they do too. > I think it's a perception that we need to address. It is simple to address this perception with fact checking. The next releases will provide even more code for ARM and NPUs. If someone submits some good code and is ignored, it is easy enough to ping the mailing list and make it visible. If someone sees any regression on his architecture, we care. Please let's stop maintaining confusion on this topic. DPDK *is* truly open.