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 >
