On 5/2/15, 6:40 AM, "Neil Horman" <nhorman at tuxdriver.com> wrote:
>On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 01:36:58PM -0700, Matthew Hall wrote: >> On Fri, May 01, 2015 at 10:59:32PM +0300, Aaro Koskinen wrote: >> > Projects like GCC, GLIBC, binutils, busybox, etc or what? >> > >> > A. >> >> You'll notice all of these are low-level UNIX hacker sorts of tools >>mostly, >> with the partial exception of busybox. But even that is mainly for >>embedded >> use. It doesn't mean I don't think they're good and useful, but it does >>limit >> the possible size of the community in my view. >> >> Since we are talking about how to get the largest widest community >>possible >> for DPDK, it could require doing things a bit differently from how many >> low-level tools have historically done things. >> >Why? > >Contributors to GCC: ~600 (based on svn) review >Contrubutors to glibc : ~300 (based on git) review >Contributors to binutils: ~600 >Contributors to busybox: ~300 > >Contributors to DPDK: ~125 I think the DPDK community can grow the number above and as we move toward VNF/NFV I think it will grow to a much wider group of developers and not a niche project as you stated. We can be much more then some of the above IMHO. > >Now I grant you that dpdk is a newer, much more niche project, but its >disingenuous to state that we _have_ to do things differently to reach a >wider >audience. We can, but its by no means a prerequisite to gainining a wider >audience. >
