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 7017EC14 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:10:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mx2.suse.de (mx2.suse.de [195.135.220.15]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0BC8242D for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:10:58 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 00:10:56 +0100 (CET) From: Jiri Kosina To: Theodore Ts'o In-Reply-To: <20171029100816.pmq5dpmck4cclmdw@thunk.org> Message-ID: References: <20171029100816.pmq5dpmck4cclmdw@thunk.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] Maintainer's Summit 2017 Feedback Thread List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Sun, 29 Oct 2017, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > Please reply to this thread if you have any comments about how we can > organize the Maintainer's Summit for next year. Given that Linus seemed > fairly happy with how things went, it's likely we will stick with the > same format for next year, but if there are any details about how we > could do things better, I'd greatly appreciate them. I think the format generally proved to make sense; it really helped the conversation to flow in an informal but still productive fashion. The two downsides from my personal POV: - room choice; I guess that's pretty obvious and not really worth too much discussion (especially the pillars and the constant noise being generated by the staff in the background) - I can't help it, but the overall number of attendees seemed to be a little bit *too* small. I'm not asking for a revival of a 90+ people on the kernel summit (that absolutely doesn't fit the nature of discussions and the format), but perhaps 40 would make sense? There definitely were a few moments when I felt that the discussion came to a point where having one particular missing person would be helpful. I guess that given this was the first time we've had this limited setup, we are still converging to the "best" group size? Thanks, -- Jiri Kosina SUSE Labs