From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 742F9A73 for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2018 05:17:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-io1-f46.google.com (mail-io1-f46.google.com [209.85.166.46]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D70AE13A for ; Thu, 13 Sep 2018 05:17:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io1-f46.google.com with SMTP id q5-v6so2169848iop.3 for ; Wed, 12 Sep 2018 22:17:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180913025609.GD20595@thunk.org> References: <20180913025609.GD20595@thunk.org> From: Daniel Vetter Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 07:17:13 +0200 Message-ID: To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER SUMMIT] community management/subsystem governance List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 4:56 AM, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 05:31:25PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote: >> >> Yup, fully agreed. We don't need another overview over group >> maintainer ship. Also I don't think an update from arm-soc/tip or drm >> is interesting either. I think only if there's a new group/subsystem >> trying this out, with all the nitty-gritty details of "this totally >> blew up in our faces" and "this worked shockingly well" and "here we >> need to improve still, we're not happy" is what I'm looking for. >> Without those details there's nothing really to learn, beyond just >> rehashing one of the old discussions. I guess I should have put more >> emphasis on _new_ experiments :-) >> >> And if nothing changed, no new groups I think think we should table >> this right away. > > I wonder if this is something that would be better done at the Kernel > Summit (e.g., in Vancouver), as a discussion session. It's important > to remember that Maintainer's Summit has (by design) a small number of > attendees. If the goal is to compare notes about various experiments, > it's likely there will be many kernel developers present in Vancouver. > After all, getting input from just "Maintainers" but all developers > participating in development process would be valuable. Yes, that was at least my idea for all of these topics. I wasn't sure what label to pick since it's not really a tech topic either. -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch