From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: git trees organization Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 00:03:30 +0200 Message-ID: <2737351.pD9poAUtZC@xps> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org To: ferruh.yigit@intel.com, stephen@networkplumber.org Return-path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB57B1B53 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 00:03:31 +0200 (CEST) List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Hi all, As you know I am currently the only maintainer of the master tree. It is very convenient because I need to synchronize with others only when pulling "next-*" trees. But the drawback is that I should be available very often to avoid stalled patches waiting in patchwork backlog. I feel it is the good time to move to a slightly different organization. I am working closely with Ferruh Yigit for almost one year, as next-net maintainer, and I think it would be very efficient to delegate him some work for the master tree. I mean that I would use the patchwork delegation to explicitly divide the workload given our different experiences. Ferruh, do you agree taking this new responsibility? At the same time, we can think how to add more git sub-trees: Should we create next-net-intel for Intel networking drivers? Any volunteer? Should we create next-bus for bus API and drivers? Stephen Hemminger is working on a new bus. Would you be interested by taking the responsibility of this git tree? Should we create next-mem for malloc/mempool? Should we take ethdev patches into next-net? Other suggestions?