From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D310B43 for ; Tue, 23 May 2017 19:29:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bedivere.hansenpartnership.com (bedivere.hansenpartnership.com [66.63.167.143]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22FAC14B for ; Tue, 23 May 2017 19:29:58 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1495567796.27369.29.camel@HansenPartnership.com> From: James Bottomley To: Linus Torvalds , ksummit Date: Tue, 23 May 2017 12:29:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] "Maintainer summit" invitation discussion List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 2017-05-23 at 10:58 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > One open question mark that James mentioned is just he vendor people > - particularly if they end up being KS sponsors. I have actually > traditionally liked the talks from vendors when they talk about their > issues (as long as they were actual technical talks, not the > marketing stuff - that's been a disaster), but I know some people > found them annoying. But I think that is partly organizational and > ends up involving Angela etc. We've always had sponsor people at the > KS, I would not mind if they ended up having double roles as sponsor > people with actual maintainer issues that they'd like to bring up. I'm happy to try to wrangle interesting and highly technical vendor talks. I believe the current time plan for the maintainer summit is half a day (is this correct?), so I propose we do vendor talks in the other half of the day. That way people who aren't interested can take the afternoon or morning (depending where people want it in the timetable) off to see Prague. James