From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAFACC07E96 for ; Sun, 11 Jul 2021 07:22:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15F766127C for ; Sun, 11 Jul 2021 07:22:54 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 15F766127C Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dev-bounces@dpdk.org Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBBD94068C; Sun, 11 Jul 2021 09:22:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-io1-f49.google.com (mail-io1-f49.google.com [209.85.166.49]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1862740040 for ; Sun, 11 Jul 2021 09:22:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-io1-f49.google.com with SMTP id z26so6677772ioz.11 for ; Sun, 11 Jul 2021 00:22:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=WDP4yjR6mh/qRvc4l1h2drZDTON28adtLjrAs/1hF8w=; b=umaJn8G+mWk4BOsdxsfBqpENPs+3GfF1JiXQB0jxNv2cRaOei2LUaqPAQIiJgkrASh fXECtO+owYlc7M2eb7dH0sxh6ZaHrJp1XbE+Lxr/n01yxbZjadUbBTOxm6ayAIKd5nks RhERHa3BKxK4AGAjthPX52HR1ayPYmUWyS2Y9Efnd2QzvE4La2zP0iNvQ5iRHJXSXRsx tha434zdKNCEGJrdo4qRmL2EGEPHQ7tTkxRawX1K6HfZPv774AW38RM2MlquF2+o83Hk td5rmpbraWvP5x7nv3yOgQN6cAyA9mg36okSzqSkHBg1dpi8vJt2Kjd2AkJj7j2mvTsi fo4Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WDP4yjR6mh/qRvc4l1h2drZDTON28adtLjrAs/1hF8w=; b=XlTLMmJdnz/2/W5opRCeKQALQsynA9YUhKPVPuczL0djCmaLC3UksBYnz3nGC2HmwE K944IBobb/B4iNHDFA9aEOxw3BR1vEa92BbQ3r362+cuemFKI7imCb+urVjj2+NUAKWY 6GHH/ZhbuJOkUaej3ikQRsdy+Q+qu1fMzgt1lg9ygJw8zK9O2TJTZpNE36dEZcMW+7tz BUo2bkHJpx2vpzFESU+pHNvbJovrh1w/rCeQ8nX1zKK5JKq0yPTVRBDhtSsDMuqcY7jh Wvsgl5JnYgsTdhXWJ0laZbaAj6evx9KFeR6Lc6PuwtMEFSBUuompwXmG3EwFDLd/1Dh1 VH+A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533JlNEoVmRsrwHvRJG2FTQUmsW4LVN3X4ElCG+oZZD+npGcCdx7 gyOQ0/uNZMzDnn//nAR9ivOyclpd0CqOqWKIUOM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJywqi4ghiSl1idFlu20KGiHBoSmOAg3B0TuWBzxcVDeMlGhQZKc/JXC3FAF92vz/kNXwvGnbdq8F0sdSdtmuuw= X-Received: by 2002:a02:8521:: with SMTP id g30mr39187080jai.113.1625988170387; Sun, 11 Jul 2021 00:22:50 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210629160031.74681-1-mdr@ashroe.eu> <20210701103842.161275-1-mdr@ashroe.eu> <20210709191559.GA2540@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> In-Reply-To: <20210709191559.GA2540@linuxonhyperv3.guj3yctzbm1etfxqx2vob5hsef.xx.internal.cloudapp.net> From: Jerin Jacob Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2021 12:52:24 +0530 Message-ID: To: Tyler Retzlaff Cc: Ray Kinsella , dpdk-dev , "Richardson, Bruce" , John McNamara , Ferruh Yigit , Thomas Monjalon , David Marchand , Stephen Hemminger Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v3] doc: policy on the promotion of experimental APIs X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Sat, Jul 10, 2021 at 12:46 AM Tyler Retzlaff wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 09, 2021 at 11:46:54AM +0530, Jerin Jacob wrote: > > > + > > > +Promotion to stable > > > +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > + > > > +Ordinarily APIs marked as ``experimental`` will be promoted to the stable ABI > > > +once a maintainer and/or the original contributor is satisfied that the API is > > > +reasonably mature. In exceptional circumstances, should an API still be > > > > Is this line with git commit message? > > Why making an exceptional case? why not make it stable after two years > > or remove it. > > My worry is if we make an exception case, it will be difficult to > > enumerate the exception case. > > i think the intent here is to indicate that an api/abi doesn't just > automatically become stable after a period of time. there also has to > be an evaluation by the maintainer / community before making it stable. > > so i guess the timer is something that should force that evaluation. as > a part of that evaluation one would imagine there is justification for > keeping the api as experimental for longer and if so a rationale as to > why. I think, we need to have a deadline. Probably one year timer for evaluation and two year for max time for decision to make it as stable or remove.