From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756898AbYE2VPn (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 17:15:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756148AbYE2VPN (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 17:15:13 -0400 Received: from www.church-of-our-saviour.ORG ([69.25.196.31]:58913 "EHLO thunker.thunk.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755650AbYE2VPL (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 May 2008 17:15:11 -0400 Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 17:14:04 -0400 From: Theodore Tso To: David Miller Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, ksummit-2008-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Ksummit-2008-discuss] Fixing the Kernel Janitors project Message-ID: <20080529211404.GH8065@mit.edu> Mail-Followup-To: Theodore Tso , David Miller , benh@kernel.crashing.org, James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com, ksummit-2008-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20080528.225826.40264516.davem@davemloft.net> <1212041839.8888.38.camel@pasglop> <20080529124548.GC8065@mit.edu> <20080529.135431.235149338.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080529.135431.235149338.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.15+20070412 (2007-04-11) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: tytso@mit.edu X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on thunker.thunk.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 01:54:31PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > Ted, we are adults and professional kernel hackers. > > If you put us in a room together, we know what the heck to talk > about and what is relevant. So saying we need to plan the topics and > invite the right people, that's pure hogwash, just invite the same > kind of people we've always been inviting and it will be fine. I do assume people we invite are adults. That being said, *some* amout of structure is still a good thing. And as others have pointed out, sometimes the sharper disagreements are with people who aren't invited. If we know we want to try talk about LSM/Apparmor YET AGAIN (no I'm not advocating this; besides, I thought Linus has already made it clear that people who depend on path-oriented security are on crack :-), we might end up inviting some folks that we might not otherwise include, just to take one example. So if people want to talk about things that aren't on the agenda, it's certainly not carried down by Moses from the mountain and cast in stone; besides, Charles Heston has already passed away. :-) > Yes, process is important, but I'd say it deserved 1/3 of the summit > time, but not one minute more. We were about 50-50 last time, roughly. So let's see if there is consensus to dial it back this year, based on topics that people suggest. - Ted