From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-il1-f176.google.com (mail-il1-f176.google.com [209.85.166.176]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0B46170 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 19:55:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-il1-f176.google.com with SMTP id b14so2975104ilq.7 for ; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:55:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yThRUwhG7TVMYzDnZQ36xlr9oSGBGPDfSkCu6ZGlYLg=; b=bPBjb3iQyivF7+ujnusT5zb7CgKPA/MPb60wwSSgl0fWJCJFIRsspxS5FLO3i3Db7o QTBIFLfWtoa+OTwkJsl8Od0iL6SjdITaP1KUiA1ZLnO0nbgYzNu8qBP6bqF9wOw6coVS 0TZuIt7YeN1EtKC3bKArUXZMWQq1C4xTGVKSk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=yThRUwhG7TVMYzDnZQ36xlr9oSGBGPDfSkCu6ZGlYLg=; b=X0ey6CLrVPThnzNsiSh/ESUxey62DBvSJDZNCgt/HhZbTaqlxK8kO5ldpVoGfArgE4 dtMqMqQ3pJirLiQnjQ1tOuiZ68Lfhwp18KXMrI1c+iVLw7erQvLh2BWXlEPXsvomY5MI PFj5DVHmzzs0RUrClg36RmZxD9WFB+5f2OIUt9mh3W3D/FpAL5eTuYVekSNwKL5h6J/f lwZoU4UVJ3yi3pSOI1ZubZdLkcrynwz3OhrBYR2E50QsOUmXfa0jrL43ItLzTpav6s68 0FPwHBfZGUGIsDC3jkF51s1Ax0nI8QiTnjPJ8osT6WM8wba7arpKD8wHSbHP5QF+4U0e PwJg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533qZLjl3zKGDCs73lqHmZSxB4ldrkLzZ5Cr8ql47mj/rz1XHd3z mXog4Piu+1BovoxByrq2/hvmlg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxrEvwWy3XAmz/7jj02iTalwtXM7UAmJCMJjFJ1UH5U58C7wt3JsSnlbOrDwD06v36kFE802g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:4b0:: with SMTP id e16mr335801ils.71.1623354925138; Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:55:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.112] (c-24-9-64-241.hsd1.co.comcast.net. [24.9.64.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u18sm2447941ilb.51.2021.06.10.12.55.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 10 Jun 2021 12:55:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off To: Steven Rostedt , Laurent Pinchart Cc: Konstantin Ryabitsev , "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" , David Hildenbrand , James Bottomley , Greg KH , Christoph Lameter , Theodore Ts'o , Jiri Kosina , ksummit@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan References: <5038827c-463f-232d-4dec-da56c71089bd@metux.net> <20210610182318.jrxe3avfhkqq7xqn@nitro.local> <20210610152633.7e4a7304@oasis.local.home> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: <37e8d1a5-7c32-8e77-bb05-f851c87a1004@linuxfoundation.org> Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:55:23 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 X-Mailing-List: ksummit@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20210610152633.7e4a7304@oasis.local.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 > Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site >> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of conferences, by >> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. This is >> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the conference >> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V >> equipment than usual ? > > I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the > understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am), > is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be > "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is going > on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless > you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that > will just destroy the conference IMO. > > That said, I think we should add more to make the communication better > for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs > followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote > attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might > have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and > beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a discussion > with the remote attendees. > > The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees can > at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If > video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where they > can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations. > You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience without restricting in-person experience. - Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to enable remote participants to chime in and participate. - Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go unnoticed and enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in person. It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees. thanks, -- Shuah