From: NeilBrown <neilb@suse.de>
To: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2012 Kernel Summit: Call for Participation: 2nd CALL
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 13:28:48 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120621132848.34686272@notabene.brown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1Sh0DC-0005D9-7n@tytso-glaptop.cam.corp.google.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1440 bytes --]
A second call -- after only 4 days.
How many calls will there be? How long do we have to respond?
If those of us who happen to be on vacation now (getting out of the way well
before the kernel summit), want to delay thinking about a proposal until
we're back at work, is that OK, or might we miss out?
>
> This year, in order to make the selection process more transparent,
... and I really am having trouble figuring out how this makes it more
"transparent".
It certainly makes it more noisy. And maybe that is a good thing. There
does seem to be more content on the list this time and that is at least
partly good. But is it more transparent?
For transparency we would need to see how the selection process will work -
when the closing date is, how the proposals will be assessed etc.
Will the committee's deliberations be public? Will there be an appeal
process?
If not, then the process isn't really transparent.
But this doesn't bother me as I think transparency is over-rated.
I'd much rather have competent leadership than transparent leadership, and
assuming the committee is the same as previous years (was the committee
membership announced? I didn't see it) then I have no doubts about their
competence.
So keep up the good work, but if transparency is really what you want then I
think you need a little more than just asking people to justify their places.
Thanks,
NeilBrown
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 828 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-06-21 3:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-19 15:19 2012 Kernel Summit: Call for Participation: 2nd CALL Theodore Ts'o
2012-06-21 3:28 ` NeilBrown [this message]
2012-06-21 18:11 ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-22 2:03 ` Kukjin Kim
2012-06-22 18:18 ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-25 14:47 ` Fengguang Wu
2012-06-25 17:23 ` Tejun Heo
2012-06-25 14:43 ` Fengguang Wu
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=20120621132848.34686272@notabene.brown \
--to=neilb@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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