[Ksummit-discuss] TAB Nomination

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB Nomination

[Dan Williams]

Please add my name to the list of nominees for this year's TAB elections.

The responsibilities of a TAB member were a mystery when I ran
unsuccessfully in 2015, and were still unclear when I was elected in
2016. The common thread of motivation to try again in 2016 and stand
now in 2018 remains. It remains, tempered, but also strengthened by
the events of the past TAB term. The motivation is my perception is
that there is more work to be done to help scale maintainer resources,
and keep pace with the growth of new contributors and new problem
spaces.

I signed-off on the Code of Conduct as a starting point for a wider
discussion. I perceived that in some areas the project was falling
short of the Code of Conflict's stated of goal of fostering "be
excellent to each other" discourse, or that interactions were not
living up to the Management Style sentiment that "it's best to
remember not to burn any bridges, bomb any innocent villagers, or
alienate too many kernel developers". A baseline conduct document
frees us up to apply focus to wider process discussions. It seeks to
address exceptional cases and makes space to continue the work of
optimizing our day-to-day processes.

It has become clear to me that the "TA" in TAB is less about about
technical advice, and more about performing the role of a Trusted (by
the community) Adviser. Select people to the TAB that you trust to act
in the best interests of the long term health of the Linux Kernel
project. It is my hope that the past 13 years of my active
participation in the project has demonstrated an ability to listen and
respond to community concerns, and advocate for the health and
sustainability of the project.

[Tech-board-discuss] TAB Nomination

[Dan Williams]

Please add my name to the list of nominees for this year's TAB elections.

The responsibilities of a TAB member were a mystery when I ran
unsuccessfully in 2015, and were still unclear when I was elected in
2016. The common thread of motivation to try again in 2016 and stand
now in 2018 remains. It remains, tempered, but also strengthened by
the events of the past TAB term. The motivation is my perception is
that there is more work to be done to help scale maintainer resources,
and keep pace with the growth of new contributors and new problem
spaces.

I signed-off on the Code of Conduct as a starting point for a wider
discussion. I perceived that in some areas the project was falling
short of the Code of Conflict's stated of goal of fostering "be
excellent to each other" discourse, or that interactions were not
living up to the Management Style sentiment that "it's best to
remember not to burn any bridges, bomb any innocent villagers, or
alienate too many kernel developers". A baseline conduct document
frees us up to apply focus to wider process discussions. It seeks to
address exceptional cases and makes space to continue the work of
optimizing our day-to-day processes.

It has become clear to me that the "TA" in TAB is less about about
technical advice, and more about performing the role of a Trusted (by
the community) Adviser. Select people to the TAB that you trust to act
in the best interests of the long term health of the Linux Kernel
project. It is my hope that the past 13 years of my active
participation in the project has demonstrated an ability to listen and
respond to community concerns, and advocate for the health and
sustainability of the project.

Re: [Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Chris Mason]

On 12 Nov 2018, at 23:09, Andy Lutomirski wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:58 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> 
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 22:12:32 -0800
>> Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>>> [resend -- I tried to send this earlier, but it seems to have
>>> disappeared into the ether]
>>>
>>
>> Hi Andy,
>>
>> I added you to the Google Doc, but it may be too late for the slides,
>> and the ballot (we will have a write in space).
>>
>> I didn't see a previous email, nor do I even see this one on the
>> tech-board-discuss list. I wonder if it may be because it could be 
>> case
>> sensitive, and you used a capital T for Tech-board-discuss?
>>
>
> My best guess is that I composed it on a computer but hit send from
> the iOS Mail app, and it seems like doing that occasionally results in
> the email appearing to send but actually going nowhere.
>

Thanks Andy, Peter did get you onto the ballot, and I'm adding you to 
the slide show now.

-chris

Re: [Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Andy Lutomirski]

On Mon, Nov 12, 2018 at 10:58 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 22:12:32 -0800
> Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > [resend -- I tried to send this earlier, but it seems to have
> > disappeared into the ether]
> >
>
> Hi Andy,
>
> I added you to the Google Doc, but it may be too late for the slides,
> and the ballot (we will have a write in space).
>
> I didn't see a previous email, nor do I even see this one on the
> tech-board-discuss list. I wonder if it may be because it could be case
> sensitive, and you used a capital T for Tech-board-discuss?
>

My best guess is that I composed it on a computer but hit send from
the iOS Mail app, and it seems like doing that occasionally results in
the email appearing to send but actually going nowhere.

--Andy

Re: [Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Steven Rostedt]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2018 22:12:32 -0800
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:

> [resend -- I tried to send this earlier, but it seems to have
> disappeared into the ether]
> 

Hi Andy,

I added you to the Google Doc, but it may be too late for the slides,
and the ballot (we will have a write in space).

I didn't see a previous email, nor do I even see this one on the
tech-board-discuss list. I wonder if it may be because it could be case
sensitive, and you used a capital T for Tech-board-discuss?

-- Steve

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Andy Lutomirski]

[resend -- I tried to send this earlier, but it seems to have
disappeared into the ether]

I'd like to nominate myself for the TAB.

I wrote my first kernel patch in 2005 or so when I fixed an obscure
kernel bug, and I've been contributing to the kernel more seriously
for about nine years.  In that time, I've been mentored (or perhaps
groomed) by quite a few kernel developers, I've had my patches
objected to plenty of times (politely and sometimes less politely),
I've cleaned up a lot of x86 code and a decent amount of generic code,
and I've reveiwed a whole lot of other people's code.  In the latter
endeavor, I've tried to pass the mentoring mentality on -- I do my
best to treat problematic patches as an opportunity to help their
authors improve the patches and their own knowledge of the kernel.

I've been a member of the security@kernel.org list for several years,
and, for better or for worse, I was heavily involved in the very early
Meltdown mes^Wcoordination effort as well as some other less well
publicized cross-vendor efforts.  While I believe that the
security@kernel.org process works quite well for smaller, Linux-only
security issues, for issues where the reporter reasonably expects
serious cross-vendor coordination (like Meltdown, Spectre, L1TF, etc),
I think that some measures could be taken by the Linux Foundation to
help prepare for a more efficient and less politicized process.  I've
discussed some of these on previous ksummit-discuss threads, and I
think that the TAB would be an appropriate venue to explore some of
these ideas.

Finally, an obligatory comment about the Code of Conduct.  I was not
meaningfully involved in most of the CoC process.  I think we ended up
with a reasonable CoC interpretation document, but I find it
unfortunate that the kernel now has both the somewhat ill-fitting CoC
itself as well as the interpretation document.  For contributors who
are merely trying to follow the rules, it's harder than it ought to be
to tell what the rules are.  More importantly, I think there's more
focus on rules than the whole situation really deserved.  When I
started working on low-level x86 code, I was welcomed quite well by
the maintainers, but that had nothing to do with their following any
particular rules, and certainly not because there were rules with
teeth.  My welcome was good because the maintainers were welcoming --
they treated my mistakes as learning opportunities and did not insult
me or reject my contributions out of hand.  This idea doesn't just
apply to new contributors -- I regularly review patches from
longstanding kernel programmers who are touching a subsystem that
they're not familiar with, and I regularly submit patches to parts of
the kernel that I haven't been heavily involved with.  I try to be
friendly and helpful when reviewing these types of contribution, and I
hope for the same treatment in my own contributions.  I would like to
see more focus on this idea.  If someone reviews a patch or criticizes
a developer in a way that's less than ideal, I would rather see other
community members help them see *how* their email was problematic and
how they could have done better.  In my view, this would be much
better than merely having a process to determine whether the offending
email violated a code, let alone whether it was worthy of some sort of
sanction.

Thank you all for your consideration,
Andrew Lutomirski

P.S. I won't be at LPC this year.  I hope to make it next year, though.

Re: [Ksummit-discuss] TAB Nomination

[Chris Mason]

On 12 Nov 2018, at 20:31, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 01:46:31 -0200
> Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've been actively working at the Linux Kernel since 2005, not only 
>> as a
>> developer but also maintaining the Media subsystem with due care. At 
>> the
>> time I started doing it, on my spare time, we started with about 30 
>> patches
>> merged per Kernel release, having a consistent sustainable  grow 
>> along this
>> time. We have now about 400-500 patches per merge window, being one 
>> of the
>> most active development community. I also didn't miss a single merge 
>> window.
>
> Hi Mauro,
>
> I added you to the Google Doc, but it may be too late to get added to
> the slide show.

Also in the slide show ;)  I'm not sure if Peter has finalized the 
ballot yet, but there is a write-in space if not.

-chris

Re: [Ksummit-discuss] TAB Nomination

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 13 Nov 2018 01:46:31 -0200
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I've been actively working at the Linux Kernel since 2005, not only as a
> developer but also maintaining the Media subsystem with due care. At the
> time I started doing it, on my spare time, we started with about 30 patches
> merged per Kernel release, having a consistent sustainable  grow along this
> time. We have now about 400-500 patches per merge window, being one of the
> most active development community. I also didn't miss a single merge window.

Hi Mauro,

I added you to the Google Doc, but it may be too late to get added to
the slide show.

-- Steve

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB Nomination

[Mauro Carvalho Chehab]

Hi,

I've been actively working at the Linux Kernel since 2005, not only as a
developer but also maintaining the Media subsystem with due care. At the
time I started doing it, on my spare time, we started with about 30 patches
merged per Kernel release, having a consistent sustainable  grow along this
time. We have now about 400-500 patches per merge window, being one of the
most active development community. I also didn't miss a single merge window.

I've also been participating at the Kernel Summits and on other LF events 
for quite a while, and having organized/participated events specific for
the media development since 2007, as I believe that face to face meetings
help a lot to make our community stronger and helps to solve problems and
get consensus on themes that would otherwise require a lot of time and
efforts to do via other means.

I'm feeling that it is now the time to give one step further and to
offer my contributions as a TAB member.

I believe I can add value to TAB, as it sounds clear to me that we
want to give a message that the Kernel community is a welcomed place 
for everyone, and not just for the US/EU white people. I believe that 
having a South American representative that was very welcomed at the
Kernel community, with does a great job and that strongly believe that 
we've being doing a great job over those years to accept good code,
no matter about physical and cultural aspects of the developer will
help to spread the message that we welcome everyone that can write
good Kernel code and can behave inside an open source community.

I also believe that I can contribute to attract more developers that
don't match a specific stereotype and help to conduct discussions
that will help our community to grow on a sane way.

Cheers,
Mauro

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hello,

I would like to stand for the TAB election.

Governance and conduct have recently become a very hot topic in our community. 
Only the timing should have caught us by surprise, as problems in those areas 
have been known for a long time. During the past few years I reflected upon 
those issues and on many occasions discussed them with developers and 
maintainers from different subsystems. There was a large consensus that we 
were not doing great, but at the same time helplessness (and sometimes 
despair) were prevalent. I would like to turn those negative emotions into 
positive actions to help our community.

While not a political correctness activist, I believe in the balance between 
freedom of thoughts and expression, and respect and civilized interactions 
between humans. As such, I would like to improve the feedback and decision 
processes in the Linux kernel to give everybody a chance to be heard and be 
part of our community. This is why I would like to stand for the election.

In addition to governance and conduct, I have long thought that our 
maintenance process is flawed. The Linux kernel has grown over the past 27 
years in what is largely seen as unique in free software and software in 
general. With my very first contact with Linux kernel development nearly 20 
years ago, and my first sizable contribution in 2005, I have witnessed, from 
the inside, the community evolving. We have collectively brought the Linux 
kernel into the 21st century and turned this hobbyist project into a 
professional project without forgetting where we came from. We can't stop 
there.

The Linux kernel is probably, in most areas, more welcoming today than it has 
ever been. Despite this, interactions between developers and maintainers 
generate lots of frustration. On the positive side, this means we have lots of 
room for improvement. Several subsystems have experimented with alternatives 
to the historical maintenance scheme, with various levels of success, but we 
largely remain a hierarchical community with a traditional power structure. I 
believe we could improve this by giving more power to developers, for the 
greater good of the community, and would like to bring that vision to the TAB. 
This is why I would like to stand for the election.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB Nomination

[Laura Abbott]

I'd like to nominate myself for the TAB. I sometimes blog about the kernel
community and this is a chance for me to actually put my money where
my mouth is.

I've been working in the kernel community long enough at this point that
people know who I am as a Fedora kernel maintainer and a contributor
in the security and ARM areas. I also joined the kernel community recently enough
that I can remember what it was like to be a beginner starting out. I usually
tell people that I've had a fairly positive experience in the kernel community
and I'd like to make sure that everyone can have an even better experience.
The kernel community has certainly grown and changed over the years
and it's important to both reflect on how far we've come and what else we
can do to make things better.

I was certainly in favor of seeing a stronger code of conduct as the previous
code of conflict had deficits in certain areas. I've also learned a lot reading
the objections people had to both the code of conduct itself and how it
was implemented. I strongly believe that a strong code of conduct and
a being a community that values technical excellence are well aligned goals.
Continuing to discuss these issues transparently is an going to be an important
point going forward.

The TAB has worked on a number of tricky issues such as malicious GPL
compliance for the betterment of the kernel community. I'd like to see
the TAB continue to work on issues like the Code of Conduct and also
think about what more can be done to work on building up new contributors
and maintainers to support the existing maintainers. I don't believe I have
all the answers or will always be right but I look forward to the chance to
learn and help serve the kernel community.

Thanks,
Laura

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Kees Cook]

Hi,

I'm volunteering to stand for election to the TAB.

My primary concern for the kernel is security. I've been a member of
the security@kernel.org response team for 5 years, and I've been
herding cats with the Kernel Self-Protection Project for 3 years. I
have frequently worked kernel-wide across many subsystems, or many
architectures, when helping landing various security defenses. This
cross-maintainer work is a unique social and technical challenge, and
the topic of "security" is a similarly wide and unique challenge. I'd
like to represent both of these concerns on the TAB.

In addition to being an active kernel developer and maintainer, I also
bring several "downstream" perspectives on how the kernel is consumed.
I understand the concerns of a general purpose distro, having worked
on Ubuntu for 5 years. More recently, I know the demands of special
purpose device vendors, having worked on Chrome OS, Brillo, and
Android over the last 7 years.

I was a reluctant supporter of the Code of Conflict (it did not go far
enough), but I was even more unhappy with the sudden Code of Conduct
(due to lack of decision transparency and potential for very
counter-intuitive interpretations). I am, however, a fan of the base
intent and the recent clarifications: I've not enjoyed the times I've
been yelled at by Linus, and I have not liked seeing other toxic
interactions in the community. I'd like to help make sure the TAB
continues to support a positive social dynamic for contributors to the
kernel, stays up front about these kinds of changes going forward, and
that it is not unduly influenced by external forces.

Thanks for your consideration,

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Shuah Khan]

Hi All,

As an active contributor and maintainer, I enjoy collaborating with talented
group of developers with diverse backgrounds and expertise. As a maintainer
and a developer, I have the responsibility to uphold the technical standards
to make the Linux kernel better in each release.

I started out as an independent contributor to the Android mainlining effort.
I maintain Kernel Selftest and USB over IP drivers. My role as a Kselftest
maintainer has overlaps with several critical kernel sub-systems and
continues to challenge me to be a good citizen of the community while
encouraging others to do the same.

During my previous tenure as a TAB member, I contributed to the Linux Kernel
Community Enforcement Statement work. It was behind the scenes work to explain
the need for the statement and get developers, maintainers and Corporate
members to lend their support. It was a very important effort for the
continued success of the Linux kernel in the industry as the platform for
open source eco-systems. I am proud to have played an important role in the
process.

It has been an eventful and challenging couple of months for the Linux
Community with the recent developments. The Code of Conduct introduction
and subsequent discussion shined a spotlight on the community.

I have been active and vocal in the efforts to initiate an open discussion
to review the Code of Conduct to evolve it to allay concerns from the
community. I strongly believe the CoC is a step in the right direction for
us as a community to continue to be a welcoming place while maintaining high
technical and code standards for acceptance.

I am running for TAB to continue the efforts to evolve the CoC process as
a member of the Technical Advisory board and work towards making the
community a welcoming place for a diverse group of developers.

I believe I can bring a unique perspective of women in the open source
community to the TAB. I hope I can count on your support to help represent
the community.


thanks,
-- Shuah

[Ksummit-discuss] TAB nomination

[Olof Johansson]

Hi all,

My two-year term on the TAB is up this year and I'd like to stand for
re-election.

It's been a somewhat stressful time for the TAB lately, given the Code
of Conduct changes that we ended up in the middle of, but I've also
found the work to be meaningful and worthwhile. Some portions of it
around process and procedures are not yet complete, and I'd like an
opportunity to see it through.

Specific contributions from me around the code of conduct have been
the separation of direct TAB and code of conduct work in a cooperative
way that also provides a second level of checks if needed. I've also
been pushing for the need for timely anonymous statistics from the
TAB/committee, with the hope that it will ease off some of the fears
of the unknown as these changes are made.

Besides those recent developments, some of the work I've felt most
satisfaction from through the years is when I've been able to help get
companies and other contributors to come in and participate upstream.
In particular some ARM vendors have come a long way in working with
the community, even if it is always a work in progress.

I've been around the kernel project for about 15 years, and maintainer
of arm-soc together with Arnd and Kevin for 7 years now. For most of
this time I've been involved in embedded platforms in some way or
other, and it's a viewpoint and representation I bring to the TAB that
hasn't traditionally been heavily represented.


Thanks,

-Olof