On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 9:10 PM Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On 13/02/2023 09:26, jer...@marvell.com wrote: > > From: Jerin Jacob <jer...@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 <jer...@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. > > + - Any licensing constraints. > > + - Justification for adding to DPDK. > > + - Any other implementations of the same functionality in other > > libs/products and how this version differs. > > - Dependencies > > (Need to know if it's introducing new dependencies to the project)
Ack. I will add in next version. > > > + - 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. > > + > > How about having three outcomes: > - Approval in principal > - Not approved > - Further information needed Ack. I will add in next version. >
