On Fri, 2017-05-05 at 09:24 -0400, John Meneghini wrote:
> Also, with these changes we are trying to encourage more community
> participation.  
> 
> I think there are many other individuals and companies in the SPDK community
> who have a stake in these change. As we go through this list of proposed
> patches (31 in all) I’d like to see some reviews and approvals from others in
> the community. 
> 
> Can we agree upon a criteria for approval with changes? 
> 
> I propose a criteria of at least 3 approvals for all commits:
> 
> 1. from the proposing individual or representative company
> 2. from the Intel SPDK development team
> 3. from a third party
> 
> Thoughts?

Feedback is always welcome from anyone. I encourage anyone with an opinion to
post comments on the pull requests. We'll leave each request open for a few days
minimum to solicit feedback.

The official process is that the SPDK maintainers (currently Daniel, Jim, and
myself) can accept or deny a patch as we see fit. However, in practice that's
going to mean that we've gathered feedback from all of the interested parties
and we're confident that the patch meets everyone's needs. We won't ever just
plow ahead without consensus unless we're not getting any participation.

For this particular series, we're not going to merge anything unless both you
and Ranjit are ok with it (or provide no feedback for an extended period of
time), since you two are the primary stakeholders in this effort. We're also
going to try and poke a few people who have shown interest in this in the past
and try to get some more feedback that way. If anyone else is interested in the
DPDK/POSIX abstractions and starts commenting, we'll make sure their feedback is
all incorporated into the final patches as well.