Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] GPL defense issues

[Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>]

On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 04:38:47PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2016 at 3:08 PM, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> > Anyway, we try to stick to technical topics from the developers of the
> > kernel for the kernel summit wherever possible, and I think that the
> > deadline for proposing new topics has passed, so I don't think there's
> > much that can be done this late in the process.
> 
> Hm, I always thought the point of KS is to talk about process,
> painpoints in the same and other topics of larger scale. Personally I
> think Karen's topic fits into this, and I think it would be
> interesting (at least for me). The pure technical topics are
> interesting to keep up on general things, but lwn.net does a great job
> at covering these wherever they happen - no reason for me to fly
> around the globe for those. At least that's been my experience with
> the past few KS, I've always took home a lot more from the
> process/more general sessions than the latest deep technical topic.
> Might just be that gfx folks are somewhat in a world of their own.

It's not just you.  Kernel Summit exists to cover things that a mailing
list discussion just won't work for.  We can handle the vast majority of
technical issues with asynchronous, distributed discussions, to the
point that Kernel Summit regularly rejects some technical topics either
because they don't actually need an in-person discussion or because
someone just needs to go write a patch or make an RFC proposal.  Process
issues, on the other hand, go much more smoothly if you get the right
people in the room, quickly bounce around a few concrete possibilities,
and make a call for what path to start down (even if that changes
later).