From: "Chris Mason" <clm@fb.com>
To: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com>
Cc: lsf-pc <lsf-pc@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-mm@kvack.org>, <linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Btrfs BTRFS <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [LSFMMBPF TOPIC] long live LFSMMBPF
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2020 14:27:45 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <76B62C4B-6ECB-482B-BF7D-95F42E43E7EB@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <b506a373-c127-b92e-9824-16e8267fc910@toxicpanda.com>
On 6 Mar 2020, at 9:35, Josef Bacik wrote:
>
> Many people have suggested this elsewhere, but I think we really need
> to seriously consider it. Most of us all go to the Linux Plumbers
> conference. We could accomplish our main goals with Plumbers without
> having to deal with all of the above problems.
I think James and Ted have covered pretty well why Plumbers isn’t a
great fit, but I agree with the overall idea.
>
> 1) The invitation process. This goes away. The people/companies that
> want to discuss things with the rest of us can all get to plumbers the
> normal way. We get new blood that we may miss through the invitation
> process because they can simply register for Plumbers on their own.
>
Lsfmmmbop has always been most useful when focused on smaller and
tighter sessions that aren’t well suited to open audiences. I think
the BPF and MM sessions are generally really happy with their size and
level of discussion, while the FS one would benefit from a larger crowd
split up by project. This is much easier to do if we’re attached to a
bigger conference, where the plenary sessions are available to the whole
conf and the breakout sessions are smaller and completely project
focused.
I think we’ve outgrown the original name, but I’d still call it
something, we’ll need rooms and t-shirts and maybe a group event that
we need to fund.
> 2) Presentations. We can have track miniconfs where we still curate
> talks, but there could be much less of them and we could just use the
> time to do what LSFMMBPF was meant to do, put us all in a room so we
> can hack on things together.
Agree here, although kernel recipes is a great example of a conf people
visit for the presentations.
>
> 3) BOFs. Now all of the xfs/btrfs/ext4 guys can show up, because
> again they don't have to worry about some invitation process, and now
> real meetings can happen between people that really want to talk to
> each other face to face.
>
> 4) Planning becomes much simpler. I've organized miniconf's at
> plumbers before, it is far simpler than LSFMMBPF. You only have to
> worry about one thing, is this presentation useful. I no longer have
> to worry about am I inviting the right people, do we have enough money
> to cover the space. Is there enough space for everybody? Etc.
We’ve talked about working closely with KS, Plumbers and the
Linuxfoundation to make a big picture map of the content and frequency
for these confs. I’m sure Angela is having a busy few weeks, but lets
work with her to schedule this and talk it through. OSS is a good fit
in terms of being flexible enough to fit us in, hopefully we can make
that work.
-chris
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-06 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-06 14:35 [LSFMMBPF TOPIC] Killing LSFMMBPF Josef Bacik
2020-03-06 15:29 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-03-06 15:30 ` [Lsf-pc] " Amir Goldstein
2020-03-06 15:55 ` Josef Bacik
2020-03-06 15:56 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-06 16:08 ` Josef Bacik
2020-03-06 19:48 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-06 18:30 ` Rik van Riel
2020-03-07 18:54 ` [LSFMMBPF TOPIC] LSFMMBPF 2020 COVID-19 status update Luis Chamberlain
2020-03-07 19:00 ` Josef Bacik
2020-03-07 19:12 ` James Bottomley
2020-03-06 16:04 ` [LSFMMBPF TOPIC] Killing LSFMMBPF Nikolay Borisov
2020-03-06 16:15 ` James Bottomley
2020-03-06 16:28 ` Christian Brauner
2020-03-06 16:31 ` Josef Bacik
[not found] ` <20200306160548.GB25710@bombadil.infradead.org>
2020-03-06 17:04 ` Al Viro
2020-03-06 17:37 ` James Bottomley
2020-03-06 18:06 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2020-03-06 19:07 ` Martin K. Petersen
2020-03-06 19:15 ` James Bottomley
2020-03-06 19:20 ` Martin K. Petersen
2020-03-06 18:23 ` Matthew Wilcox
2020-03-06 19:25 ` James Bottomley
2020-03-06 19:27 ` Chris Mason [this message]
2020-03-06 19:41 ` [LSFMMBPF TOPIC] long live LFSMMBPF James Bottomley
2020-03-06 19:56 ` Chris Mason
2020-03-06 20:25 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o
2020-03-07 3:14 ` [LSFMMBPF TOPIC] Killing LSFMMBPF Steve French
2020-03-10 13:13 ` Michal Hocko
2020-03-10 13:40 ` Josef Bacik
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=76B62C4B-6ECB-482B-BF7D-95F42E43E7EB@fb.com \
--to=clm@fb.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=josef@toxicpanda.com \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lsf-pc@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).