Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [LSFMMBPF TOPIC] Killing LSFMMBPF
From:   Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
To:     lsf-pc <lsf-pc@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
        Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org,
        Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org
References: <b506a373-c127-b92e-9824-16e8267fc910@toxicpanda.com>
Message-ID: <94dff81a-f0bb-1f91-999b-50bf29b75f4a@toxicpanda.com>
Date:   Fri, 6 Mar 2020 10:55:57 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b506a373-c127-b92e-9824-16e8267fc910@toxicpanda.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-ext4-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 3/6/20 9:35 AM, Josef Bacik wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> This has been a topic that I've been thinking about a lot recently, mostly 
> because of the giant amount of work that has been organizing LSFMMBPF.  I was 
> going to wait until afterwards to bring it up, hoping that maybe it was just me 
> being done with the whole process and that time would give me a different 
> perspective, but recent discussions has made it clear I'm not the only one.
> 
> LSFMMBPF is not useful to me personally, and not an optimal use of the 
> communities time.  The things that we want to get out of LSFMMBPF are (generally)

It has been pointed out to me that this appears to make it sound like I think 
the whole conference is useless.  I would like to make it clear that this is not 
the case at all.  This is still the only conference that I make sure to make it 
to every year, because all of the reasons I list.

The point of me posting this is to get us to put some real thought into what 
would be the most optimal way to accomplish the same things in a different way. 
Maybe I should have titled it "Make LSFMMBPF great again!" instead.

I feel that there is a lot of fat to trim here, and many voices not being heard 
because of the way the conference is organized.  If I'm the only one then that's 
cool, but if I'm not I'd like people to think really hard about what the ideal 
meetup looks like, and how we can move in that direction.  Thanks,

Josef