[Ksummit-discuss] "Maintainer summit" invitation discussion

Linus Torvalds torvalds at linux-foundation.org
Wed Apr 19 19:40:47 UTC 2017

On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart at ideasonboard.com> wrote:
> 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 do agree that it would be a great thing to have a "bitch at
maintainers" session where developers get to vent frustration at how
their patches are (or are _not_) accepted by maintainers.

I know we've had issues in the VFS layer, with Al sometimes
effectively dropping off the intenet for a time, for example.  And I'm
sure it happens elsewhere too, I'm just aware of the VFS side because
it's one of the areas where I end up personally being a secondary

But the problem with that "bitch at maintainers" thing is that I can't
for the life of me come up with a sane small set of people to do that.
So I don't see it happening ;(

Anyway, I have tried to gather "other groups" that aren't in that
top-10 maintainers list, but are examples of people "around" the
maintenance issues:

 - stable and linux-next:

   Ben Hutchings (stable)
   Stephen Rothwell (linux-next)

 - Infrastructure:

   Konstantin Ryabitsev (k.org)
   Fengguang Wu (kernel test robot)
   Steven Rostedt (ktest)
   Shuah Khan (tools/testing)
   Thorsten Leemhuis (regression tracking)
   Jonathan Corbet (documentation)

 - Security:

   Andy Lutomirski (security and core)
   Kees Cook (security)
   James Morris (security subsystem)

 - distro people:

   Laura Abbott (Fedora)
   Jiri Kosina (MM? JM?) (Suse)
   Rom Lemarchand (Android)

 - Hw vendor people?
 - Sponsor people?

but I can't come up with a sane set of "leaf developers" or anything
like that. We've just got too many. That's obviously a good problem to
have, but it doesn't fit with the maintainer summit, because unless
somebody can come up with some kind of prototypical spokesperson for
that group (and to me, that doesn't seem likely), I don't see how to
do it.

(And I still suspect that we do want coverage of some remaining
maintainership areas, ie filesystem and block layer, because the
"top-10 maintainers" don't cover that at all. And I haven't heard
suggestions for the networking side either, still assuming that Daem
isn't interested since he never has been before..)


More information about the Ksummit-discuss mailing list