Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Draft Maintainer's Summit Agenda and Attendees

[<Tim.Bird@sony.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Bottomley
> 
> On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 11:00 -0700, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 08:13:17AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2018-10-16 at 10:11 +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > > >  And I don't see anyone else from an external community with real
> > > > experience (or someone who does consulting in this area) invited
> > > > to fill that gap either.
> > >
> > > I don't buy the narrative that you must be a CoC consultant or
> > > implementor to make a difference.
> >
> > We typically don't make major changes in a specialized domain without
> > consulting domain experts, to avoid building a solution that won't
> > work or ignores well-known issues in that domain. We wouldn't go off
> > and build a virtualization subsystem without consulting
> > virtualization experts; we wouldn't build a storage subsystem without
> > consulting storage experts; we wouldn't hack on a license without
> > consulting legal experts; the same applies here.
> 
> I notice you carefully cut the part about people who've been active in
> helping the kernel in this regard already being present;

I think that characterizing Joshes response as having "carefully cut" a section
has a little more implication of mal intent that I'd prefer.  I think you can reiterate
your point about having people there that you consider to be domain experts
present, without this.

> so we do have
> some domain experts ... plus no external ones have actually been
> proposed at this point.

It seemed pretty obvious to me that Daniel was referring to himself
or someone else from the subsystem (DRM?) that's already adopted
the CoC.  But a more explicit recommendation (like a candidate name)
would add clarity to the discussion.

> We also don't usually listen deferentially to domain experts ...
> spectre and meltdown would be a case in point here.

You don't have to be deferential to domain experts to benefit
from their experience.

Having said that, I don't think a short face-to-face session is going
to yield much in the way changes, and the list of invitees was worked
out already over a long period of time.   And as you stated previously
there will be other venues (both face-to-face and online) to add input
to the process.

Personally I don't see much benefit in changing the invitee list at this
point, and some dangers.  Not everyone who wants to be there can. 
That's OK with me.  I'm not invited either.
 -- Tim