rom: Jerin Jacob <jerinj at marvell.com>
Based on TB meeting[1] action item, defining
the process for new library approval in principle.
[1]
https://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2023-January/260035.html
Signed-off-by: Jerin Jacob <jerinj at marvell.com>
---
content/process/_index.md | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 33 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 content/process/_index.md
diff --git a/content/process/_index.md b/content/process/_index.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..21c2642
--- /dev/null
+++ b/content/process/_index.md
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
++++
+title = "Process"
+weight = "9"
++++
+
+## Process for new library approval in principle
+
+### Rational
+
+Adding a new library to DPDK codebase with proper RFC and then full patch-sets
is
+significant work and getting early approval-in-principle that a library help
DPDK contributors
+avoid wasted effort if it is not suitable for various reasons.
+
+### Process
+
+1. When a contributor would like to add a new library to DPDK code base, the
contributor must send
+the following items to DPDK mailing list for TB approval-in-principle.
+
+ - Purpose of the library.
+ - Scope of the library.
I'd probably extend it to:
Scope and expected usage models of the library.
Apart from that - LGTM.
Acked-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.v.anan...@yandex.ru>
+ - Any licensing constraints.
+ - Justification for adding to DPDK.
+ - Any other implementations of the same functionality in other
libs/products and how this version differs.
+ - Public API specification header file as RFC
+ - Optional and good to have.
+ - TB may additionally request this collateral if needed to get more
clarity on scope and purpose.
+
+2. TB to schedule discussion on this in upcoming TB meeting along with author.
Based on the TB
+schedule and/or author availability, TB may need maximum three TB meeting
slots.
+
+3. Based on mailing list and TB meeting discussions, TB to vote for
approval-in-principle and share
+the decision in the mailing list.
+
--
2.39.1
