From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv7 00/47] NXP DPAA2 PMD
Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 17:48:13 -0500
Message-ID: <20170217224813.GA8861@neilslaptop.think-freely.org>
References: <1485172803-17288-1-git-send-email-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
 <1487205586-6785-1-git-send-email-hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>
 <20170216132249.GA18056@hmswarspite.think-freely.org>
 <20170216132751.GA100024@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <eae7dd92-1644-29f8-7db3-a1da2d414b40@intel.com>
 <20170217121358.GA135568@bricha3-MOBL3.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <8479045a-fb1c-78c9-cfde-a669633249e8@6wind.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>,
 Ferruh Yigit <ferruh.yigit@intel.com>,
 Hemant Agrawal <hemant.agrawal@nxp.com>, dev@dpdk.org,
 thomas.monjalon@6wind.com, shreyansh.jain@nxp.com,
 john.mcnamara@intel.com, jerin.jacob@caviumnetworks.com
To: Vincent JARDIN <vincent.jardin@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from smtp.tuxdriver.com (charlotte.tuxdriver.com [70.61.120.58])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0555282
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 17 Feb 2017 23:49:20 +0100 (CET)
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <8479045a-fb1c-78c9-cfde-a669633249e8@6wind.com>
List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org
Sender: "dev" <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>

On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 01:17:26PM +0100, Vincent JARDIN wrote:
> Le 17/02/2017 à 13:13, Bruce Richardson a écrit :
> > If it builds without an SDK dependency I'd be happy enough to see this
> > merged into DPDK.
> 
> +1, the patch is clean enough to be compiled.
> 
> Boards or CPUs can rely on specific SDK, firmware, etc., it is up to the
> vendors.
> 
I absolutely disagree with this.  Its completely anathema to the reason open
source code is beneficial to the community that maintains it.  By allowing code
like this into the project, you've tacitly agree to do regular maintenence on
their code for them, without the reciprocating benefit of being able to use
their hardware free of additional license terms.  If you want to have a non-open
driver that works with an open source project, thats fine, but keep it out of
tree, and maintain it yourself.  What you've esentially asked for here is for
the dpdk community to be some free labor, when APIS and such change.  No thank
you.

I re-iterate my NAK.

> regards,
>   Vincent
>