[Ksummit-discuss] "Maintainer summit" invitation discussion

Laurent Pinchart laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com
Wed Apr 19 19:25:44 UTC 2017


Hi Linus,

On Tuesday 18 Apr 2017 13:13:37 Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Takashi Iwai <tiwai at suse.de> wrote:
> > On Tue, 18 Apr 2017 20:59:37 +0200, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >> Some driver subsystems may be huge (eg media and sound), but I
> >> don't know if they have issues. Mauro/Takashi?
> > 
> > In the sound area, majority of commits come from Mark Brown's ASoC
> > tree nowadays, and he should be included.  Mark is already in your
> > list, so we're covered pretty well by that.
> 
> Ok. I don't know how many from that top-50 list we actually would be
> able to have.
> 
> Not only do I think that we should try to limit it to maybe ~35 people
> (random number taken out of thin air, but feels small enough that
> people could basically just do it in a smaller room and keep things
> personal), but the list is just the 50 kernel maintainer side.
> 
> And there's another important side to this if we can make it work: the
> *users* of the kernel. Notably I'd really like to have kernel leads
> from the main distros, ie Android, Fedora, Suse, Ubuntu.

Agreed, for a maintainer summit to be useful, we need to have multiple sides 
present. Gathering core maintainers with key representatives of the downstream 
communities around the table is great, but I think we would be missing one 
category whose opinion is equally important: kernel developers.

When everything goes well developers can be represented by their maintainers. 
That's the case where the process flows smoothly, so there isn't likely to be 
much to discuss. However, problems occurring in the maintenance process are 
likely to result in, if not conflicts, at least different views between 
maintainers and developers, in which case developers won't be represented at 
the summit.

I'm not sure how to handle that. I certainly don't want to increase the number 
of attendees to include key representatives of developers (and while I'd be 
very curious to see how they would be selected, I doubt it would work in 
practice), but I also believe we need to address this class of maintainership 
issues.

> I think that when we talk about process pain points, we definitely
> need to have downstream involved. Greg is there with his stable
> maintainer hat on too, but he's still "ours".
> 
> It would be really good to have whoever is in charge of the Android
> kernel there (not manager, but tech lead), and not make it a blame
> game, but really try to also talk about how we could perhaps bridge
> that gap somehow.
> 
> I'm not sure who those people actually are, but I suspect this list
> contains people who can point to each tech lead.. I think it's Laura
> Abbott for Fedora, for example?
> 
> > Do you plan it to be attached with some major conference, or as a
> > stand-alone one?
> 
> Oh, I was just assuming people were aware of the kernel summit <->
> maintainer summit thing.
> 
> So this would be the maintainer side of the traditional kernel summit.
> 
> This year it would be October in Prague, co-located with the European
> ELC / LinuxCon / OpenSourceSummit thing.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart



More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list