Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751716AbXAaWte (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:49:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751717AbXAaWte (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:49:34 -0500 Received: from omx2-ext.sgi.com ([192.48.171.19]:52081 "EHLO omx2.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751715AbXAaWtd (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:49:33 -0500 Message-ID: <45C11CE7.5070804@sgi.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:49:11 +0100 From: Jes Sorensen User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070103) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Dave Jones , Jes Sorensen , Matt Domsch , Randy Dunlap , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ksummit-2007-discuss@thunk.org, James Bottomley , alan@redhat.com Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2006-discuss] 2007 Linux Kernel Summit References: <8355959a0701251646t4b7db48cj862268aad52e8e24@mail.gmail.com> <20070126032849.GB5589@thunk.org> <8355959a0701260704x6aea8141s3d0581fa33c74cf2@mail.gmail.com> <20070126195024.GE14759@thunk.org> <45BE8BF9.6020204@sgi.com> <1170118042.3378.45.camel@mulgrave.il.steeleye.com> <45BEF0C5.7090401@sgi.com> <20070130083025.1332a6ea.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <20070131005218.GB30457@lists.us.dell.com> <45BFFD2F.3000004@sgi.com> <20070131201433.GC6186@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20070131201433.GC6186@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: 1649 Lines: 37 Dave Jones wrote: > If it makes you feel better, I'll stand down as a PC member, and > attempt attendance on merit. I'm seriously tired of the allegations > that there's underhand things going on. Dave, I'm sorry you feel that way, that is not the intention of it. I raise the issue of the number of members, and particularly the fact that seats are sold off to sponsors to the level they are. If we didn't continuously get touted that this has to be restricted to death to the point of being constructive this wouldn't be a problem, but thats where it is. Gerrit mentioned that half the committee shows up to be dead weight when it comes down to the crunch at the end, so if this is the case, does it really make sense to keep said members on the committee? LCA had how many proposals? they handled it with a 7-8 member group I believe, and yes I know Rusty did bitch about having to read a couple of hundred papers, but they did pretty darn well. > All the PC committee members last year were on the same voting sheet > as everyone else. Theoretically, I could have given low votes to > Andi, Ted and everyone else on the PC, but that would be ridiculous > given the work they do, and the value they've added to previous summits. If a person on the committee qualifies under the technical requirements decided upon by the committee, then obviously that person should be invited too. 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/