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 ACE23133C for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 21:20:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf1-f173.google.com (mail-pf1-f173.google.com [209.85.210.173]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 254612D5 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 21:20:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf1-f173.google.com with SMTP id k19-v6so5912147pfi.1 for ; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 14:20:12 -0700 (PDT) To: James Bottomley , Linus Torvalds References: <1536263073.6012.3.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1536267088.6012.7.camel@HansenPartnership.com> <1536268421.6012.9.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: Jens Axboe Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 15:20:08 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1536268421.6012.9.camel@HansenPartnership.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: ksummit Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [MAINTAINER TOPIC] Succession Planning: Is It time to Throw Linus Under a Bus? List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 9/6/18 3:13 PM, James Bottomley wrote: > On Thu, 2018-09-06 at 13:59 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 1:51 PM James Bottomley >> wrote: >>> >>> It's happened occasionally, but it's not very traditional.  Usually >>> when people do a palace coup replacement, the tumbrels are waiting >>> outside to cart the old dictator off to their sticky end. >> >> This has taken a dark turn. > > You were the one who mentioned dictators ... I was perfectly happy with > the bus. > >> I do want to point out that I brought the question up last year on >> the spot. I didn't get any reaction then. I was thinking me not being >> around would have been more conducive to discussion. But whatever. > > OK, so we could still have a plebiscite in Vancouver; we have the room > and the time still reserved. It could propose a succession plan and > just present it to you. I admit there's precedent; it's how we did the > next TAB chair for instance. > > However, I really think for an orderly succession plan, you need to be > part of it rather than having a palace coup which could end up being > really messy and divisive. I suspect people treated your proposal last > year as more of a joke last year because they didn't think you were > serious. If you're really serious about doing this, let's try to come > up with the succession process in Edinburgh in October and see if we > can run a Maintainer Summit with the new Leadership in Vancouver in > November. This seems rather hasty to me, I think it would be prudent to establish a timeline (on both sides?). Unless you are really proposing a coup? -- Jens Axboe