From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Mcnamara, John" <john.mcnamara@intel.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: DPDK Long Term Support
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2016 16:21:21 +0000
Message-ID: <B27915DBBA3421428155699D51E4CFE20257D07D@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <B27915DBBA3421428155699D51E4CFE20257B8E3@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
 <20160605181513.GA11762@neilslaptop.think-freely.org>
 <37570042.soqC7jPioi@xps13>
 <20160606134742.GA3867@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Christian Ehrhardt
 <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>, Markos Chandras <mchandras@suse.de>,
 "Panu Matilainen" <pmatilai@redhat.com>
To: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, Thomas Monjalon
 <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Return-path: <dev-bounces@dpdk.org>
Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 798565A83
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Tue,  7 Jun 2016 18:21:25 +0200 (CEST)
In-Reply-To: <20160606134742.GA3867@hmsreliant.think-freely.org>
Content-Language: en-US
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <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>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Neil Horman
> Sent: Monday, June 6, 2016 2:48 PM
> To: Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Mcnamara, John <john.mcnamara@intel.com>; Christian
> Ehrhardt <christian.ehrhardt@canonical.com>; Markos Chandras
> <mchandras@suse.de>; Panu Matilainen <pmatilai@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] RFC: DPDK Long Term Support
>=20
> While I don't disagree with that statement (LTS does provide both of thos=
e
> things if the maintainer does it properly), I'm forced to ask the
> question, before we solve this problem in a new way, lets ask why the
> existing way isn't being used.  Do developers just not care about
> backwards compatibility?  Is the process to hard?  Something else?  I
> really don't like the idea of abandoning what currently exists to replace
> it with something else, without first addressing why what we have isn't
> working.

Hi Neil,

I think these questions around why the current ABI policy isn't working=20
(or at least not working well) and how it can be fixed are worth raising
as a new discussion.

John.
--=20