No one is proposing any close door planning session and commits for ARM port of DPDK already staretd.
Pradeep On 11/3/15 3:35 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Mon, 2 Nov 2015 15:16:16 -0800 > Pradeep Kathail <pkathail at cisco.com> wrote: > >> Tim and Dave, >> >> I agree that an architecture board membership should be based on >> technical standing and contribution but at the same time, >> if you are trying to bring a new hardware paradigm into a project, you >> need to give a chance to some of those experts to >> participate and gain the standing. >> >> If community is serious about supporting SOC's, my suggestion will be >> to allow few (2?) members from SOC community for >> limited time (6? months) and then evaluate based on their contributions. >> >> Pradeep > Why doesn't one or more SOC vendors contribute patches or discuss > the issues on the mailing list or at DPDK meetings. I dont think we > need a behind closed doors planning session on this. Much prefer > the old "consensus and running code model". > . >