Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752533AbXA3Evp (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2007 23:51:45 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752534AbXA3Evo (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2007 23:51:44 -0500 Received: from omx2-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.19]:58856 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752533AbXA3Evo (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Jan 2007 23:51:44 -0500 Message-ID: <45BECEB4.6060905@sgi.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 05:51:00 +0100 From: Jes Sorensen User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Jones , Jes Sorensen , Theodore Tso , Sunil Naidu , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dirk.hohndel@intel.com, alan@redhat.com, ksummit-2007-discuss@thunk.org, David Miller Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2006-discuss] 2007 Linux Kernel Summit References: <20070123.095756.30177490.davem@davemloft.net> <20070125.125121.98861775.davem@davemloft.net> <8355959a0701251646t4b7db48cj862268aad52e8e24@mail.gmail.com> <20070126032849.GB5589@thunk.org> <8355959a0701260704x6aea8141s3d0581fa33c74cf2@mail.gmail.com> <20070126195024.GE14759@thunk.org> <45BE8BF9.6020204@sgi.com> <20070130030430.GA21772@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20070130030430.GA21772@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2162 Lines: 47 Dave Jones wrote: > > Then there is the issue of architectures, at least in my book KS should > > focus on the ones that are really live and not in maintenance mode. > > x86_64, x86_32, PPC, ia64, ARM seems to be the driving ones these days, > > m68k, Sparc32, and others, somewhat less so ..... > > Again, I don't recall us spending any time at all discussing m68k, or > sparc, whilst the others you mention were well represented. Hi Dave, I'm not too bothered about the subjects, but rather the issue that we keep seeing this strict "only this small group, which defines the most important people in the community" thing. Thats where I think the current model fails, even if someone has done a lot of work all over Linux for years, doesn't mean said people are the ones driving things this year. Personally I think Andrew's suggestion is really good, turning it more towards the traditional conference means people who have something they want to say are more likely to push for things. If one doesn't have something to say, then going to the KS is probably not the right thing. > One of the problems with this approach is sometimes we don't know about > subjects that become important to us all until the last minute, and > others that seem important now will become moot by the time the summit comes around. Thats true, and there should certainly be space for new subjects coming in on short notice. However, I would suggest that at least a significant portion of the summit applies this requirement. Most of the more important issues are architectural and it's often not something that shows up last minute. > So far though, there's been nothing proposed at all, so feel free > to throw your hat in the ring, if nothing else, it'll kickstart > the process. Actually I'm in the process of investigating launching a mini summit cabal, which I think would cover most of my current issues :) Cheers, Jes - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/