From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>
Cc: ksummit@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Time to call it quits for the maintainer summit?
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 15:58:25 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260807125825.GL2201016@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8ae41b73983eee6ba716a61b8701df6522a02baa.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
On Thu, Aug 06, 2026 at 11:34:09AM -0400, James Bottomley wrote:
> What got me thinking about this is the obvious funding problem: MS is
> free to attendees, but only had one sponsor in 2024, none in 2025 and
> is on track to have none this year.
The sponsorship prospectus ([1]) indicates that the "attendee gift"
category is sold out, does it mean one sponsor signed up ?
[1] https://events.linuxfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/sponsor-kernel26_080626.pdf
> Since Plumbers has a reasonably
> successful sponsor model and the LF brought the problem up in recent
> conversations, we thought we'd take a look. A colleague remarked that
> it should be easy to sell seats to a room with Linus, which on the face
> of it looks to be true, but when examined more deeply isn't
> straighforward. The problem is conferences like Plumbers, LSF/MM and
> MS are usually sponsored by engineering not marketing where budget is
> much harder to come by and the justification for ponying up the cash
> has to be very clear; effectively they pay for outcomes not access or
> publicity (although access is required to get successful outcomes).
> When you look at the actual outcomes of MS 2025
>
> https://lwn.net/Articles/1049982/
>
> there isn't really anything that would move the needle for a potential
> sponsor. Equally, there's nothing really that couldn't have been part
> of a wider discussion at Plumbers or LSF/MM, so I'm not sure there's
> anything that actually required discussion at this event (i.e. nothing
> to move the needle for kernel developers either).
>
> Before I go into potential solutions, it might be beneficial to review
> the history: The kernel summit began as a stand alone event in 2001
> run by USENIX and was the first time many kernel developers had
> actually met each other. It continued as a 2 day event co-located with
> Ottawa Linux Symposium (still run by USENIX) until 2008 when it mostly
> co-located with Plumbers and was run by the LF. In 2015 Linus
> complained that he didn't find the KS talks that valuable and he'd like
> to discuss process with a smaller audience, so in 2016 the kernel
> summit was split and the talks went to the kernel summit track in
> Plumbers and a 1 day Maintainer Summit was born. It can be argued that
> the decline in sponsors began with the 2016 split and thus, as the
> sponsors apparently see it, the decline in outcomes as well. Oh and
> for those of you who keep saying the LF doesn't fund Linux: without
> sponsors the LF is eating the cost of the entire event which, based on
> what Plumbers costs, will be somewhere north of US$100k.
>
> As for fixes, one possibility is definitely keeping MS as is and moving
> the sponsor responsibility to Plumbers, but unless I can strap Linus
> down and sell companies on pitching to him directly, I fear that would
> end up creating a US$100k hole in our budget. Perhaps there are
> actually outcomes we could sell to sponsors but, because of the reduced
> audience, we simply don't get to hear about them ... so if you think
> that now would be the time to say what they are. Another solution that
> seems viable would be folding the MS into one of our existing sponsored
> events, like Plumbers or LSF/MM. Structurally either would be a fit
> for the past discussion topics and both could probably accommodate
> (although I don't think either could expand to a fourth day to do it).
> A final thing we might do is change the structure of the event itself
> to have more sponsorable outcomes; perhaps simply making the event more
> like the kernel summit of old, so moving back the KS track from
> Plumbers would be enough?
The maintainer summit is limited to 30 guests, plus up to 7 sponsored
attendee according to [1]. Assuming neither Linus nor the program
committee are counted as guests, that would be 43 people in total, so a
rough cost of $2500 per person for one day. I understand that hosting
events in large venues is expensive, but if the maintainer summit is an
invite-only, separate event, would it be an option to drastically cut
costs by hosting it in a nearby but separate location ?
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-07 12:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-06 15:34 [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Time to call it quits for the maintainer summit? James Bottomley
2026-08-06 23:41 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-08-07 13:53 ` Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)
2026-08-07 14:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-08-07 16:33 ` James Bottomley
2026-08-07 17:27 ` Linus Torvalds
2026-08-07 19:03 ` James Bottomley
2026-08-07 19:51 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-08-07 20:12 ` Shuah Khan
2026-08-09 1:51 ` Theodore Tso
2026-08-07 12:58 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2026-08-07 13:09 ` James Bottomley
2026-08-07 13:28 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-08-07 20:15 ` H. Peter Anvin
2026-08-07 19:15 ` Chris Mason
2026-08-07 19:53 ` Steven Rostedt
2026-08-07 23:19 ` Theodore Tso
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260807125825.GL2201016@killaraus.ideasonboard.com \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=ksummit@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox