Re: Representing Embedded Architectures at the Kernel Summit

[James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>]

On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 10:52 -0700, David VomLehn wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 12:42:57PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-06-02 at 13:29 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > > Which leads me to suggest that it is at least worth having someone with an
> > > embedded focus at KS to simply keep an eye out for impacts of generic changes.
> > > "Feature parity" is something I often deal with in trying to keep ppc4xx up to
> > > speed with the rest of the archs in the kernel.
> > 
> > We're fine with this, if that's how the embedded guys would like to do
> > it ... how do you want to nominate the "someone with an embedded focus"?
> > We chose the topic driven approach because that's the one it's easiest
> > for the Kernel Summit Programme Committee to look at and make attendance
> > decisions based upon.  However, if all the embedded people want to
> > choose their own representatives, that's fine by us too ... as long as
> > you can devise a fair process.
> 
> Now, James, I think you haven't been paying attention to the embedded Linux
> world...asking us to devise *any* process is much more chaotic than herding
> cats. Expecting something everyone agrees is fair would probably take until
> at least KS 2010. That being said, we have three people who are listed in
> MAINTAINERS under embedded Linux. We might start by seeing which of them
> might take up the mantle and vote on the linux-embedded mailing list.

Even for someone as inattentive as me, the general problems of getting
embedded people to agree the sky is blue did impinge on the peripheral
consciousness.  Thus: If you can come up with such a process in a timely
fashion then fine ... if not, we'll do the topic based one suggested by
the PC.

James