Linux Kernel Summit discussions
 help / color / Atom feed
* Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
@ 2021-04-19 15:28 Theodore Ts'o
  2021-04-28 10:29 ` Jiri Kosina
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2021-04-19 15:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
	netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

[ Feel free to forward this to other Linux kernel mailing lists as
  appropriate -- Ted ]

This year, the Maintainers and Kernel Summit is currently planned to
be held in Dublin, Ireland, September 27 -- 29th.  Of course, this is
subject to change depending on how much progress the world makes
towards vaccinating the population against the COVID-19 virus, and
whether employers are approving conference travel.  At this point,
there's a fairly good chance that we will need to move to a virtual
conference format, either for one or both of the summits.

As in previous years, the Maintainers Summit is invite-only, where the
primary focus will be process issues around Linux Kernel Development.
It will be limited to 30 invitees and a handful of sponsored
attendees.

The Kernel Summit is organized as a track which is run in parallel
with the other tracks at the Linux Plumbers Conference (LPC), and is
open to all registered attendees of LPC.

Linus has generated a core list of people to be invited to the
Maintainers Summit, and the program committee will be using that list
a starting point of people to be considered.  People who suggest
topics that should be discussed at the Maintainers Summit will also be
added to the list for consideration.  To make topic suggestions for
the Maintainers Summit, please send e-mail to the
ksummit@lists.linux.dev with a subject prefix of [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT].

(Note: The older ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org list has
been migrated to lists.linux.dev, with the subscriber list and
archives preserved.)

The other job of the program committee will be to organize the program
for the Kernel Summit.  The goal of the Kernel Summit track will be to
provide a forum to discuss specific technical issues that would be
easier to resolve in person than over e-mail.  The program committee
will also consider "information sharing" topics if they are clearly of
interest to the wider development community (i.e., advanced training
in topics that would be useful to kernel developers).

To suggest a topic for the Kernel Summit, please do two things.
First, please tag your e-mail with [TECH TOPIC].  As before, please
use a separate e-mail for each topic, and send the topic suggestions
to the ksummit-discuss list.

Secondly, please create a topic at the Linux Plumbers Conference
proposal submission site and target it to the Kernel Summit track.
For your convenience you can use:

	https://bit.ly/lpc21-summit

Please do both steps.  I'll try to notice if someone forgets one or
the other, but your chances of making sure your proposal gets the
necessary attention and consideration are maximized by submitting both
to the mailing list and the web site.

People who submit topic suggestions before June 12th and which are
accepted, will be given free admission to the Linux Plumbers
Conference.

We will be reserving roughly half of the Kernel Summit slots for
last-minute discussions that will be scheduled during the week of
Plumbers, in an "unconference style".  This allows last-minute ideas
that come up to be given given slots for discussion.

If you were not subscribed on to the kernel@lists.linux-dev mailing
list from last year (or if you had removed yourself from the
ksummit-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org mailing list after the
previous year's kernel and maintainers' summit summit), you can
subscribe sending an e-mail to:

	ksummit+subscribe@lists.linux.dev

The mailing list archive is available at:

	https://lore.kernel.org/ksummit

The program committee this year is composed of the following people:

Jens Axboe
Arnd Bergmann
Jon Corbet
Greg Kroah-Hartman
Ted Ts'o

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-04-19 15:28 Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off Theodore Ts'o
@ 2021-04-28 10:29 ` Jiri Kosina
  2021-04-30 21:48   ` Theodore Ts'o
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Jiri Kosina @ 2021-04-28 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Theodore Ts'o
  Cc: ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
	netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Mon, 19 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

> This year, the Maintainers and Kernel Summit is currently planned to
> be held in Dublin, Ireland, September 27 -- 29th.  

Hi Ted,

given the fact that OSS is being relocated from Dublin to Washington [1], 
is Kernel Summit following that direction?

[1] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/press-release/the-linux-foundation-announces-open-source-summit-embedded-linux-conference-2021-will-move-from-dublin-ireland-to-seattle-washington/

-- 
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-04-28 10:29 ` Jiri Kosina
@ 2021-04-30 21:48   ` Theodore Ts'o
  2021-05-27 13:23     ` Christoph Lameter
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Theodore Ts'o @ 2021-04-30 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jiri Kosina
  Cc: ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
	netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 12:29:52PM +0200, Jiri Kosina wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> 
> > This year, the Maintainers and Kernel Summit is currently planned to
> > be held in Dublin, Ireland, September 27 -- 29th.  
> 
> Given the fact that OSS is being relocated from Dublin to Washington [1], 
> is Kernel Summit following that direction?
> 
> [1] https://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/press-release/the-linux-foundation-announces-open-source-summit-embedded-linux-conference-2021-will-move-from-dublin-ireland-to-seattle-washington/

Apologies for the delay in responding; I wasiting for the LPC to post
its announcement that the LPC will be going 100% virtual:

   https://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/blog/2021/index.php/2021/04/30/linux-plumbers-goes-fully-virtual/

As the LPC planning committee stated,

   "Unfortunately, the safety protocols imposed by event venues in the
   US require masks and social distancing which make it impossible to
   hold the interactive part of Plumbers (the Microconferences)."

The Maintainer's Summit is even more interactive and discussion
focused than most of the Microconferences.  In addition, for the last
few years, the Kernel Summit is run as a track at the LPC.  As a
result, both the Maintainer's and Kernel Summit will be held virtually
this year, using the LPC infrastructure, and will not be colocated
with OSS to Seattle.  We'll make sure the dates (plus some buffer for
travel) won't overlap to avoid creating conflicts for those who are
planning to attend OSS in Seattle.

I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and Maintainer's
Summit, we're going to have to wait for another year,

Cheers,

					- Ted

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-04-30 21:48   ` Theodore Ts'o
@ 2021-05-27 13:23     ` Christoph Lameter
  2021-05-27 13:29       ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Lameter @ 2021-05-27 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Theodore Ts'o
  Cc: Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:

> I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
> discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and Maintainer's
> Summit, we're going to have to wait for another year,

Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-27 13:23     ` Christoph Lameter
@ 2021-05-27 13:29       ` Greg KH
  2021-05-28 14:58         ` James Bottomley
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2021-05-27 13:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Christoph Lameter
  Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> 
> > I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
> > discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and Maintainer's
> > Summit, we're going to have to wait for another year,
> 
> Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
> 

Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the world
are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(

greg k-h

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-27 13:29       ` Greg KH
@ 2021-05-28 14:58         ` James Bottomley
  2021-05-28 15:11           ` Matthew Wilcox
                             ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2021-05-28 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Greg KH, Christoph Lameter
  Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > 
> > > I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
> > > discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
> > > Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
> > > year,
> > 
> > Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
> > 
> 
> Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the world
> are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(

The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
people younger than me are already vaccinated.  I think by the end of
September the situation will be better ... especially if the EU and US
agree on this air bridge (and the US actually agrees to let EU people
in).

One of the things Plumbers is thinking of is having a meetup at what
was OSS EU but which is now in Seattle.  The Maintainer's summit could
do the same thing.  We couldn't actually hold Plumbers in Seattle
because the hotels still had masks and distancing requirements for
events that effectively precluded the collaborative aspects of
microconferences, but evening events will be governed by local
protocols, rather than the Hotel, which are already more relaxed.

Regards,

James



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 14:58         ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-05-28 15:11           ` Matthew Wilcox
  2021-05-28 15:27             ` James Bottomley
  2021-05-28 15:42             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  2021-06-09 10:37           ` David Hildenbrand
  2021-06-11 11:10           ` David Howells
  2 siblings, 2 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2021-05-28 15:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Bottomley
  Cc: Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina,
	ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
	netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 07:58:10AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > 
> > > > I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
> > > > discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
> > > > Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
> > > > year,
> > > 
> > > Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
> > > 
> > 
> > Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the world
> > are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(
> 
> The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
> people younger than me are already vaccinated.  I think by the end of
> September the situation will be better ... especially if the EU and US
> agree on this air bridge (and the US actually agrees to let EU people
> in).
> 
> One of the things Plumbers is thinking of is having a meetup at what
> was OSS EU but which is now in Seattle.  The Maintainer's summit could
> do the same thing.  We couldn't actually hold Plumbers in Seattle
> because the hotels still had masks and distancing requirements for
> events that effectively precluded the collaborative aspects of
> microconferences, but evening events will be governed by local
> protocols, rather than the Hotel, which are already more relaxed.

Umm.  Let's remember that the vaccines are 33-93% effective [1],
which means that there's approximately a 100% certainty that at least
one person arriving at the event from a trans-atlantic flight has been
exposed to someone who has the virus.  I'm not convinced that holding a
"more relaxed protocol" event is a great idea.

[1] Depending exactly which vaccine, which variant, how many doses, etc, etc
https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-preprint-from-phe-on-vaccine-effectiveness-against-the-b-1-617-2-indian-variant/


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 15:11           ` Matthew Wilcox
@ 2021-05-28 15:27             ` James Bottomley
  2021-05-28 15:31               ` Laurent Pinchart
  2021-05-28 15:42             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2021-05-28 15:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Matthew Wilcox
  Cc: Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina,
	ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
	netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 16:11 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 07:58:10AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
> > > > > discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
> > > > > Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
> > > > > year,
> > > > 
> > > > Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the
> > > world are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(
> > 
> > The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
> > people younger than me are already vaccinated.  I think by the end
> > of September the situation will be better ... especially if the EU
> > and US agree on this air bridge (and the US actually agrees to let
> > EU people in).
> > 
> > One of the things Plumbers is thinking of is having a meetup at
> > what was OSS EU but which is now in Seattle.  The Maintainer's
> > summit could do the same thing.  We couldn't actually hold Plumbers
> > in Seattle because the hotels still had masks and distancing
> > requirements for events that effectively precluded the
> > collaborative aspects of microconferences, but evening events will
> > be governed by local protocols, rather than the Hotel, which are
> > already more relaxed.
> 
> Umm.  Let's remember that the vaccines are 33-93% effective [1],
> which means that there's approximately a 100% certainty that at least
> one person arriving at the event from a trans-atlantic flight has
> been exposed to someone who has the virus.  I'm not convinced that
> holding a "more relaxed protocol" event is a great idea.

Well, I'm not going to get into a debate over the effectiveness of the
current vaccines.  I will say that all conferences have to now
recognize that a sizeable proportion of former attendees will have
fears about travelling and therefore remote components are going to be
a fixture of conferences going forward.

However, while we should accommodate them, we can't let these fears
override people willing to take the risk and meet in person.

James



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 15:27             ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-05-28 15:31               ` Laurent Pinchart
  2021-05-28 15:44                 ` James Bottomley
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-05-28 15:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Bottomley
  Cc: Matthew Wilcox, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:27:44AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 16:11 +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 07:58:10AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
> > > > > > discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
> > > > > > Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
> > > > > > year,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
> > > > 
> > > > Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the
> > > > world are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(
> > > 
> > > The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
> > > people younger than me are already vaccinated.  I think by the end
> > > of September the situation will be better ... especially if the EU
> > > and US agree on this air bridge (and the US actually agrees to let
> > > EU people in).
> > > 
> > > One of the things Plumbers is thinking of is having a meetup at
> > > what was OSS EU but which is now in Seattle.  The Maintainer's
> > > summit could do the same thing.  We couldn't actually hold Plumbers
> > > in Seattle because the hotels still had masks and distancing
> > > requirements for events that effectively precluded the
> > > collaborative aspects of microconferences, but evening events will
> > > be governed by local protocols, rather than the Hotel, which are
> > > already more relaxed.
> > 
> > Umm.  Let's remember that the vaccines are 33-93% effective [1],
> > which means that there's approximately a 100% certainty that at least
> > one person arriving at the event from a trans-atlantic flight has
> > been exposed to someone who has the virus.  I'm not convinced that
> > holding a "more relaxed protocol" event is a great idea.
> 
> Well, I'm not going to get into a debate over the effectiveness of the
> current vaccines.  I will say that all conferences have to now
> recognize that a sizeable proportion of former attendees will have
> fears about travelling and therefore remote components are going to be
> a fixture of conferences going forward.
> 
> However, while we should accommodate them, we can't let these fears
> override people willing to take the risk and meet in person.

The interesting question is how we'll make sure that those people will
not be de facto excluded from the community, or end up as second-class
citizens.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 15:11           ` Matthew Wilcox
  2021-05-28 15:27             ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-05-28 15:42             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen @ 2021-05-28 15:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Matthew Wilcox, James Bottomley
  Cc: Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina,
	ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm,
	netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> writes:

> On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 07:58:10AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>> > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> > > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>> > > 
>> > > > I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
>> > > > discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
>> > > > Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
>> > > > year,
>> > > 
>> > > Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
>> > > 
>> > 
>> > Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the world
>> > are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(
>> 
>> The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
>> people younger than me are already vaccinated.  I think by the end of
>> September the situation will be better ... especially if the EU and US
>> agree on this air bridge (and the US actually agrees to let EU people
>> in).
>> 
>> One of the things Plumbers is thinking of is having a meetup at what
>> was OSS EU but which is now in Seattle.  The Maintainer's summit could
>> do the same thing.  We couldn't actually hold Plumbers in Seattle
>> because the hotels still had masks and distancing requirements for
>> events that effectively precluded the collaborative aspects of
>> microconferences, but evening events will be governed by local
>> protocols, rather than the Hotel, which are already more relaxed.
>
> Umm.  Let's remember that the vaccines are 33-93% effective [1],
> which means that there's approximately a 100% certainty that at least
> one person arriving at the event from a trans-atlantic flight has been
> exposed to someone who has the virus.  I'm not convinced that holding a
> "more relaxed protocol" event is a great idea.

Not to mention the fact that this would exclude everyone from parts of
the world that do not have a high vaccine coverage or a cosy "air
bridge" type relationship with the US (whatever that means); aren't we
supposed to be an international community? :/

-Toke


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 15:31               ` Laurent Pinchart
@ 2021-05-28 15:44                 ` James Bottomley
  2021-05-28 15:55                   ` Laurent Pinchart
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2021-05-28 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Laurent Pinchart
  Cc: Matthew Wilcox, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 18:31 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:27:44AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
[...]
> > Well, I'm not going to get into a debate over the effectiveness of
> > the current vaccines.  I will say that all conferences have to now
> > recognize that a sizeable proportion of former attendees will have
> > fears about travelling and therefore remote components are going to
> > be a fixture of conferences going forward.
> > 
> > However, while we should accommodate them, we can't let these fears
> > override people willing to take the risk and meet in person.
> 
> The interesting question is how we'll make sure that those people
> will not be de facto excluded from the community, or end up as
> second-class citizens.

Before the pandemic, there was a small contingent who refused to fly
for various reasons.  We did sort of accommodate that by rotating the
conference to Europe where more people could come in by train (like
they did in Lisbon) but we didn't govern the whole conference by trying
to make aerophobes first class citizens.

The bottom line is that as long as enough people are willing to meet in
person and in-person delivers more value that remote (even though we'll
try to make remote as valuable as possible) we should do it.   We
should not handicap the desires of the one group by the fears of the
other because that's a false equality ... it's reducing everyone to the
level of the lowest common denominator rather than trying to elevate
people.

James



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 15:44                 ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-05-28 15:55                   ` Laurent Pinchart
  2021-05-28 16:04                     ` James Bottomley
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-05-28 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Bottomley
  Cc: Matthew Wilcox, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

Hi James,

On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:44:23AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 18:31 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:27:44AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> [...]
> > > Well, I'm not going to get into a debate over the effectiveness of
> > > the current vaccines.  I will say that all conferences have to now
> > > recognize that a sizeable proportion of former attendees will have
> > > fears about travelling and therefore remote components are going to
> > > be a fixture of conferences going forward.
> > > 
> > > However, while we should accommodate them, we can't let these fears
> > > override people willing to take the risk and meet in person.
> > 
> > The interesting question is how we'll make sure that those people
> > will not be de facto excluded from the community, or end up as
> > second-class citizens.
> 
> Before the pandemic, there was a small contingent who refused to fly
> for various reasons.  We did sort of accommodate that by rotating the
> conference to Europe where more people could come in by train (like
> they did in Lisbon) but we didn't govern the whole conference by trying
> to make aerophobes first class citizens.
> 
> The bottom line is that as long as enough people are willing to meet in
> person and in-person delivers more value that remote (even though we'll
> try to make remote as valuable as possible) we should do it.   We
> should not handicap the desires of the one group by the fears of the
> other because that's a false equality ... it's reducing everyone to the
> level of the lowest common denominator rather than trying to elevate
> people.

This should take into account the size of each group, and I believe even
then it won't be a binary decision, there's lots of variation in local
situations, creating more than just two groups of coward/careless people
(let's not debate those two words if possible, they're not meant to
insult anyway, but to emphasize that there are more categories). While I
believe that in-person meetings will become the norm again in a
reasonably near future, 2021 seems a bit premature to me.

If we want to brainstorm alternate solutions, an option could be to
split the monolithic conference location into a small set of
geographically distributed groups (assuming local travel would be easier
and generally seen as an accepted solution compared to intercontinental
travels) and link those through video conferencing. I don't have high
hopes that this would be feasible in practice given the increase in
efforts and costs to organize multiple locations in parallel, but maybe
something interesting could come out of discussing different options.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 15:55                   ` Laurent Pinchart
@ 2021-05-28 16:04                     ` James Bottomley
  2021-05-28 16:31                       ` Laurent Pinchart
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2021-05-28 16:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Laurent Pinchart
  Cc: Matthew Wilcox, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 18:55 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> Hi James,
> 
> On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:44:23AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 18:31 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:27:44AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > Well, I'm not going to get into a debate over the effectiveness
> > > > of the current vaccines.  I will say that all conferences have
> > > > to now recognize that a sizeable proportion of former attendees
> > > > will have fears about travelling and therefore remote
> > > > components are going to be a fixture of conferences going
> > > > forward.
> > > > 
> > > > However, while we should accommodate them, we can't let these
> > > > fears override people willing to take the risk and meet in
> > > > person.
> > > 
> > > The interesting question is how we'll make sure that those people
> > > will not be de facto excluded from the community, or end up as
> > > second-class citizens.
> > 
> > Before the pandemic, there was a small contingent who refused to
> > fly for various reasons.  We did sort of accommodate that by
> > rotating the conference to Europe where more people could come in
> > by train (like they did in Lisbon) but we didn't govern the whole
> > conference by trying to make aerophobes first class citizens.
> > 
> > The bottom line is that as long as enough people are willing to
> > meet in person and in-person delivers more value that remote (even
> > though we'll try to make remote as valuable as possible) we should
> > do it.   We should not handicap the desires of the one group by the
> > fears of the other because that's a false equality ... it's
> > reducing everyone to the level of the lowest common denominator
> > rather than trying to elevate people.
> 
> This should take into account the size of each group, and I believe
> even then it won't be a binary decision, there's lots of variation in
> local situations, creating more than just two groups of
> coward/careless people (let's not debate those two words if possible,
> they're not meant to insult anyway, but to emphasize that there are
> more categories). While I believe that in-person meetings will become
> the norm again in a reasonably near future, 2021 seems a bit
> premature to me.

Well, this is why Plumbers and Kernel Summit are fully virtual for this
year, so you won't miss any content.  The idea of meetups is just to
test the water for restarting the social side.  In 2021 it's
necessarily going to be governed by which country is on which other
country's friends list, but hopefully that won't be the case in 2022.

> If we want to brainstorm alternate solutions, an option could be to
> split the monolithic conference location into a small set of
> geographically distributed groups (assuming local travel would be
> easier and generally seen as an accepted solution compared to
> intercontinental travels) and link those through video conferencing.
> I don't have high hopes that this would be feasible in practice given
> the increase in efforts and costs to organize multiple locations in
> parallel, but maybe something interesting could come out of
> discussing different options.

Remember, remote isn't always the best solution either.  We got
complaints last year that we were disadvantaging people without high
speed internet by using video (i.e. large swathes of Africa and Asia). 
In a physical conference we can try to counteract this disadvantage by
offering attendance sponsorship, but I can't sponsor a fibre connection
on a continental scale.  I think we need to feel our way here, and
trying out meetups for size (which are traditionally more
geographically local) could be one way to do this.

James



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 16:04                     ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-05-28 16:31                       ` Laurent Pinchart
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-05-28 16:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Bottomley
  Cc: Matthew Wilcox, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

Hi James,

On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 09:04:29AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 18:55 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:44:23AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2021-05-28 at 18:31 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> > > > On Fri, May 28, 2021 at 08:27:44AM -0700, James Bottomley wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > > Well, I'm not going to get into a debate over the effectiveness
> > > > > of the current vaccines.  I will say that all conferences have
> > > > > to now recognize that a sizeable proportion of former attendees
> > > > > will have fears about travelling and therefore remote
> > > > > components are going to be a fixture of conferences going
> > > > > forward.
> > > > > 
> > > > > However, while we should accommodate them, we can't let these
> > > > > fears override people willing to take the risk and meet in
> > > > > person.
> > > > 
> > > > The interesting question is how we'll make sure that those people
> > > > will not be de facto excluded from the community, or end up as
> > > > second-class citizens.
> > > 
> > > Before the pandemic, there was a small contingent who refused to
> > > fly for various reasons.  We did sort of accommodate that by
> > > rotating the conference to Europe where more people could come in
> > > by train (like they did in Lisbon) but we didn't govern the whole
> > > conference by trying to make aerophobes first class citizens.
> > > 
> > > The bottom line is that as long as enough people are willing to
> > > meet in person and in-person delivers more value that remote (even
> > > though we'll try to make remote as valuable as possible) we should
> > > do it.   We should not handicap the desires of the one group by the
> > > fears of the other because that's a false equality ... it's
> > > reducing everyone to the level of the lowest common denominator
> > > rather than trying to elevate people.
> > 
> > This should take into account the size of each group, and I believe
> > even then it won't be a binary decision, there's lots of variation in
> > local situations, creating more than just two groups of
> > coward/careless people (let's not debate those two words if possible,
> > they're not meant to insult anyway, but to emphasize that there are
> > more categories). While I believe that in-person meetings will become
> > the norm again in a reasonably near future, 2021 seems a bit
> > premature to me.
> 
> Well, this is why Plumbers and Kernel Summit are fully virtual for this
> year, so you won't miss any content.  The idea of meetups is just to
> test the water for restarting the social side.  In 2021 it's
> necessarily going to be governed by which country is on which other
> country's friends list, but hopefully that won't be the case in 2022.

I seem to have misunderstood the original intent (or your intent at
least) and thought the proposal was to reconsider the virtual conference
for 2021 and go fully physical. Apologies for the misunderstanding if it
was indeed one. Dreaming of having good meals in good company again
doesn't make me bitter enough to claim that if I can't have them this
year, nobody can :-)

> > If we want to brainstorm alternate solutions, an option could be to
> > split the monolithic conference location into a small set of
> > geographically distributed groups (assuming local travel would be
> > easier and generally seen as an accepted solution compared to
> > intercontinental travels) and link those through video conferencing.
> > I don't have high hopes that this would be feasible in practice given
> > the increase in efforts and costs to organize multiple locations in
> > parallel, but maybe something interesting could come out of
> > discussing different options.
> 
> Remember, remote isn't always the best solution either.  We got
> complaints last year that we were disadvantaging people without high
> speed internet by using video (i.e. large swathes of Africa and Asia). 
> In a physical conference we can try to counteract this disadvantage by
> offering attendance sponsorship, but I can't sponsor a fibre connection
> on a continental scale.  I think we need to feel our way here, and
> trying out meetups for size (which are traditionally more
> geographically local) could be one way to do this.

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 14:58         ` James Bottomley
  2021-05-28 15:11           ` Matthew Wilcox
@ 2021-06-09 10:37           ` David Hildenbrand
  2021-06-09 19:23             ` James Bottomley
  2021-06-10 18:07             ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  2021-06-11 11:10           ` David Howells
  2 siblings, 2 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: David Hildenbrand @ 2021-06-09 10:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter
  Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On 28.05.21 16:58, James Bottomley wrote:
> On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>>> On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>>
>>>> I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
>>>> discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
>>>> Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
>>>> year,
>>>
>>> Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
>>>
>>
>> Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the world
>> are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(
> 
> The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
> people younger than me are already vaccinated. 

And I know people younger than you in Germany personally ( ;) ) that are 
not vaccinated yet and might not even get the first shot before 
September, not even dreaming about a second one + waiting until the 
vaccine is fully in effect.

So yes, sure, nobody can stop people that think the pandemic is over 
("we are vaccinated") from meeting in person. Just make sure to not 
ignore the poor souls that really won't be traveling this year, because 
"we are not vaccinated".

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-09 10:37           ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2021-06-09 19:23             ` James Bottomley
  2021-06-11 10:58               ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  2021-06-10 18:07             ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: James Bottomley @ 2021-06-09 19:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter
  Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On Wed, 2021-06-09 at 12:37 +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 28.05.21 16:58, James Bottomley wrote:
> > On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > > On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter
> > > wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
> > > > > discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
> > > > > Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
> > > > > year,
> > > > 
> > > > Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the
> > > world are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(
> > 
> > The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
> > people younger than me are already vaccinated. 
> 
> And I know people younger than you in Germany personally ( ;) ) that
> are not vaccinated yet and might not even get the first shot before 
> September, not even dreaming about a second one + waiting until the 
> vaccine is fully in effect.

I said "is accelerating" not "is on a par with the US and UK".

> So yes, sure, nobody can stop people that think the pandemic is over 
> ("we are vaccinated") from meeting in person. Just make sure to not 
> ignore the poor souls that really won't be traveling this year,
> because "we are not vaccinated".

I realise the UK government attitude is that everyone should suffer
until we say it's over (mainly, it must be admitted, to try to keep
people from asking awkward questions about what went wrong initially)
and to some extent the EU shares that, but the US is definitely moving
to a regime that says once you're vaccinated it's pretty much over for
you and I don't see a problem with taking advantage of that for hybrid
style events.  However, even with the best will in the world, I can't
see much of a way around the problem that remote people at hybrid
events will always be at a disadvantage ... suggestions for improving
this are always welcome.

James



^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-09 10:37           ` David Hildenbrand
  2021-06-09 19:23             ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-06-10 18:07             ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  2021-06-10 18:23               ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
  2021-06-10 18:55               ` Linus Torvalds
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2021-06-10 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter
  Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On 09.06.21 12:37, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 28.05.21 16:58, James Bottomley wrote:
>> On Thu, 2021-05-27 at 15:29 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 27, 2021 at 03:23:03PM +0200, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 30 Apr 2021, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I know we're all really hungry for some in-person meetups and
>>>>> discussions, but at least for LPC, Kernel Summit, and
>>>>> Maintainer's Summit, we're going to have to wait for another
>>>>> year,
>>>>
>>>> Well now that we are vaccinated: Can we still change it?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Speak for yourself, remember that Europe and other parts of the world
>>> are not as "flush" with vaccines as the US currently is :(
>>
>> The rollout is accelerating in Europe.  At least in Germany, I know
>> people younger than me are already vaccinated. 
> 
> And I know people younger than you in Germany personally ( ;) ) that are 
> not vaccinated yet and might not even get the first shot before 
> September, not even dreaming about a second one + waiting until the 
> vaccine is fully in effect.

And I know *a lot* of people who will never take part in this generic
human experiment that basically creates a new humanoid race (people
who generate and exhaust the toxic spike proteine, whose gene sequence
doesn't look quote natural). I'm one of them, as my whole family.

> So yes, sure, nobody can stop people that think the pandemic is over 
> ("we are vaccinated") from meeting in person. 

Pandemic ? Did anybody look at the actual scientific data instead of
just watching corporate tv ? #faucigate


--mtx

-- 
---
Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert
werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 18:07             ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
@ 2021-06-10 18:23               ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
  2021-06-10 18:39                 ` Laurent Pinchart
  2021-06-10 18:55               ` Linus Torvalds
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Konstantin Ryabitsev @ 2021-06-10 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  Cc: David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter,
	Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 08:07:55PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> On 09.06.21 12:37, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > On 28.05.21 16:58, James Bottomley wrote:

*moderator hat on*

I'm requesting that all vaccine talk is restricted solely to how it would
impact international travel to/from ksummit.

-K

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 18:23               ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
@ 2021-06-10 18:39                 ` Laurent Pinchart
  2021-06-10 19:26                   ` Steven Rostedt
  2021-06-10 20:12                   ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-10 18:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Konstantin Ryabitsev
  Cc: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand,
	James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 02:23:18PM -0400, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 08:07:55PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote:
> > On 09.06.21 12:37, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> > > On 28.05.21 16:58, James Bottomley wrote:
> 
> *moderator hat on*
> 
> I'm requesting that all vaccine talk is restricted solely to how it would
> impact international travel to/from ksummit.

Which will largely be set by governments, travel companies and
conference venues, so there's probably very little to discuss on that
topic.

The topic of how to best organize hybrid events to maximize
inclusiveness for remote participants is more interesting to me. LPC did
an amazing job last year with the fully remote setup, but a hybrid setup
brings new challenges. One issue I've previously experienced in hybrid
setups, especially for brainstorming-type discussions, was that on-site
attendees can very quickly break out conversations in small groups (it's
an issue for fully on-site events too). Session leads should be aware of
the need to ensure even more than usual that all speakers use
microphones. I don't think we need to go as far as specific training on
these topics, but emphasizing the importance of moderation would be
useful in my opinion.

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 ?

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 18:07             ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  2021-06-10 18:23               ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
@ 2021-06-10 18:55               ` Linus Torvalds
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Linus Torvalds @ 2021-06-10 18:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  Cc: David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter,
	Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, Linux-MM,
	Netdev, linux-arch, Linux API

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 11:08 AM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
<lkml@metux.net> wrote:
>
> And I know *a lot* of people who will never take part in this generic
> human experiment that basically creates a new humanoid race (people
> who generate and exhaust the toxic spike proteine, whose gene sequence
> doesn't look quote natural). I'm one of them, as my whole family.

Please keep your insane and technically incorrect anti-vax comments to yourself.

You don't know what you are talking about, you don't know what mRNA
is, and you're spreading idiotic lies. Maybe you do so unwittingly,
because of bad education. Maybe you do so because you've talked to
"experts" or watched youtube videos by charlatans that don't know what
they are talking about.

But dammit, regardless of where you have gotten your mis-information
from, any Linux kernel discussion list isn't going to have your
idiotic drivel pass uncontested from me.

Vaccines have saved the lives of literally tens of millions of people.

Just for your edification in case you are actually willing to be
educated: mRNA doesn't change your genetic sequence in any way. It is
the exact same intermediate - and temporary - kind of material that
your cells generate internally all the time as part of your normal
cell processes, and all that the mRNA vaccines do is to add a dose
their own specialized sequence that then makes your normal cell
machinery generate that spike protein so that your body learns how to
recognize it.

The half-life of mRNA is a few hours. Any injected mRNA will be all
gone from your body in a day or two. It doesn't change anything
long-term, except for that natural "your body now knows how to
recognize and fight off a new foreign protein" (which then tends to
fade over time too, but lasts a lot longer than a few days). And yes,
while your body learns to fight off that foreign material, you may
feel like shit for a while. That's normal, and it's your natural
response to your cells spending resources on learning how to deal with
the new threat.

And of the vaccines, the mRNA ones are the most modern, and the most
targeted - exactly because they do *not* need to have any of the other
genetic material that you traditionally have in a vaccine (ie no need
for basically the whole - if weakened - bacterial or virus genetic
material). So the mRNA vaccines actually have *less* of that foreign
material in them than traditional vaccines do. And  a *lot* less than
the very real and actual COVID-19 virus that is spreading in your
neighborhood.

Honestly, anybody who has told you differently, and who has told you
that it changes your genetic material, is simply uneducated.  You need
to stop believing the anti-vax lies, and you need to start protecting
your family and the people around you.  Get vaccinated.

I think you are in Germany, and COVID-19 numbers are going down. It's
spreading a lot less these days, largely because people around you
have started getting the vaccine - about half having gotten their
first dose around you, and about a quarter being fully vaccinated. If
you and your family are more protected these days, it's because of all
those other people who made the right choice, but it's worth noting
that as you see the disease numbers go down in your neighborhood,
those diminishing numbers are going to predominantly be about people
like you and your family.

So don't feel all warm and fuzzy about the fact that covid cases have
dropped a lot around you. Yes, all those vaccinated people around you
will protect you too, but if there is another wave, possibly due to a
more transmissible version - you and your family will be at _much_
higher risk than those vaccinated people because of your ignorance and
mis-information.

Get vaccinated. Stop believing the anti-vax lies.

And if you insist on believing in the crazy conspiracy theories, at
least SHUT THE HELL UP about it on Linux kernel discussion lists.

                Linus

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 18:39                 ` Laurent Pinchart
@ 2021-06-10 19:26                   ` Steven Rostedt
  2021-06-10 19:55                     ` Shuah Khan
  2021-06-10 20:12                   ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-10 19:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Laurent Pinchart
  Cc: Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult,
	David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter,
	Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> 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.

The evening events (including going out to the bars and just hanging
with other developers) is a lost cause to try and have remote
participation.

Then the last day, perhaps have a bunch of rooms for various topics
where people can come in and continue the conversation from the evening
events but with a remote audience that can ask questions. Again, you
may need to "bribe" the attendees to come to this and interact ;-)

I'm all for making a better remote experience for hybrid events, but
I'm against doing so by making it a worse experience for those that
attend. Not saying that you suggested this, but I have heard of ideas
about limiting what happens so that the live attendees do not have any
advantage over the remote ones.

-- Steve

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 19:26                   ` Steven Rostedt
@ 2021-06-10 19:55                     ` Shuah Khan
  2021-06-10 20:02                       ` Steven Rostedt
  2021-06-10 22:43                       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Shuah Khan @ 2021-06-10 19:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  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, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api, Shuah Khan

On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300
> Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> 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

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 19:55                     ` Shuah Khan
@ 2021-06-10 20:02                       ` Steven Rostedt
  2021-06-10 20:20                         ` Matthew Wilcox
  2021-06-10 22:43                       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-10 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Shuah Khan
  Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt,
	metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH,
	Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit,
	linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev,
	linux-arch, linux-api

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:55:23 -0600
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> 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.

I have no problem with the above suggestion, and I envision that this
may be the norm going forward. What is still missing is the
interactions of the hallway track and the evening events. I was
thinking about how we could get the remote folks in on what happened
there right afterward, which is why I'm suggesting breakout rooms like
Laurent suggested as well, but at the end of the conference, and
perhaps the conversations of the previous night could continue with a
remote presence.

-- Steve

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 18:39                 ` Laurent Pinchart
  2021-06-10 19:26                   ` Steven Rostedt
@ 2021-06-10 20:12                   ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Konstantin Ryabitsev @ 2021-06-10 20:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Laurent Pinchart; +Cc: ksummit, linux-kernel

(Trimming the huge CC list)

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 09:39:49PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> The topic of how to best organize hybrid events to maximize
> inclusiveness for remote participants is more interesting to me. LPC did
> an amazing job last year with the fully remote setup, but a hybrid setup
> brings new challenges. One issue I've previously experienced in hybrid
> setups, especially for brainstorming-type discussions, was that on-site
> attendees can very quickly break out conversations in small groups (it's
> an issue for fully on-site events too).

As a (high-functioning) introvert, I'd say that a lot of it depends not so
much on the on-site/off-site nature of participation, but on individual
communication preferences. I've presented quite a bit at conferences, and, to
me, "brainstorming-type discussions" never really happen post-presentation,
largely because being in a spotlight makes me uncomfortable and I generally
try to slink away.

I suggest that something that would help is providing information on where to
ask questions in an informal setting. For example, add the following on the
last slide of your presentation:

    Thank you!

    Join the discussion:
    
    1. Mailing list: foo@lists.example.com
    2. IRC: #foochan on exampleirc.com
    3. Matrix: #foochan:example.com
    4. My email: foo@example.com

This gives enough options for folks to ask questions whether they are in the
real-life audience or attending online. Listing both your individual email and
a group chat option will help bridge many cultural divides -- some people will
feel intimidated asking a question directly (especially if you are a luminary
in your field) and will prefer to address a group. Others will feel
intimidated addressing a group (what if my question is stupid) and will prefer
to address you directly.

> Session leads should be aware of the need to ensure even more than usual
> that all speakers use microphones. I don't think we need to go as far as
> specific training on these topics, but emphasizing the importance of
> moderation would be useful in my opinion.

I think with most sessions being recorded, people are already well conditioned
to use microphones. I try to at least always repeat the question being asked
if I notice that the person asking it isn't using a mic.

> 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'm generally of the opinion that we should split conferences from hackathons,
anyway.

- conferences are great for finding about cool new things happening in your
  field, and work great online where there is no limit on how many people can
  join the stream; if the presentation is not what you thought it was going to
  be, switching to a different video stream is dramatically cheaper than
  getting out of the dark room to find a different presentation.
- hackathons are great for getting things done and meeting up with folks you
  rarely get to see in real life -- and they work well as on-site, multi-site
  or hybrid events.

For example, the maintainer summit is a "hackathon", even if there is no
actual code hacking done. The thing being hackathoned is the development
process itself and general direction of things. The LinuxCon is for sure a
conference and generally has little tangible value other than a pretext to get
your employer to pay for the trip. :)

So, perhaps more frequent but smaller events around narrower topics as opposed
to huge colocated events? I do appreciate that this is more difficult for
organizers, but perhaps it would result in more tangible benefits?

-K


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 20:02                       ` Steven Rostedt
@ 2021-06-10 20:20                         ` Matthew Wilcox
  2021-06-10 20:31                           ` Steven Rostedt
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2021-06-10 20:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Steven Rostedt
  Cc: Shuah Khan, Laurent Pinchart, Konstantin Ryabitsev,
	Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand,
	James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 04:02:46PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:55:23 -0600
> Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > 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.
> 
> I have no problem with the above suggestion, and I envision that this
> may be the norm going forward. What is still missing is the
> interactions of the hallway track and the evening events. I was
> thinking about how we could get the remote folks in on what happened
> there right afterward, which is why I'm suggesting breakout rooms like
> Laurent suggested as well, but at the end of the conference, and
> perhaps the conversations of the previous night could continue with a
> remote presence.

It's relatively common for in-person attendees at conferences to
use instant messaging platforms (whether it be IRC, twitter, Slack or
something else) to share their opinion on something the speaker just said
in a rather less disruptive way than shouting out in the middle of a talk.
If you sit at the back of a talk, most attendees have their laptops open
and at least one chat program running.

Perhaps we could actually _enhance_ conferences by forbidding
direct audience questions and having a moderator select questions /
"more of a comment actually" from an official live chat platform to
engage the speaker directly on stage.  It would segue naturally into
"the speaker is now done with their presentation and here's some good
followup discussion".  So many times people have come up to me after
a presentation and asked a question that I really wish I could have
answered for everybody there.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 20:20                         ` Matthew Wilcox
@ 2021-06-10 20:31                           ` Steven Rostedt
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-10 20:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Matthew Wilcox
  Cc: Shuah Khan, Laurent Pinchart, Konstantin Ryabitsev,
	Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand,
	James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o,
	Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel,
	linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch, linux-api

On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:20:50 +0100
Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:

> Perhaps we could actually _enhance_ conferences by forbidding
> direct audience questions and having a moderator select questions /
> "more of a comment actually" from an official live chat platform to
> engage the speaker directly on stage.  It would segue naturally into
> "the speaker is now done with their presentation and here's some good
> followup discussion".  So many times people have come up to me after
> a presentation and asked a question that I really wish I could have
> answered for everybody there.

For presentations, I think this is a very good idea. But it wouldn't
work for a BoF or a microconference.

I also thought about doing this for a presentations. That is, "Please
submit all questions online, and the presenter will answer them".

Of course, if you have someone that didn't bring their laptop or phone
(there are people that do that too). They should have a way to submit a
question as well. Perhaps instead of going in line to a microphone, go
in line to a public laptop to type in your question.

-- Steve

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 19:55                     ` Shuah Khan
  2021-06-10 20:02                       ` Steven Rostedt
@ 2021-06-10 22:43                       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  2021-06-11  2:59                         ` Willy Tarreau
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen @ 2021-06-10 22:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Shuah Khan, 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, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api, Shuah Khan

Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> writes:

> On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300
>> Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com> 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.

This is basically how IETF meetings function: At the beginning of every
session, a volunteer "jabber scribe" is selected to watch the chat and
relay any questions to a microphone in the room. And the video streaming
platform has a "virtual queue" that remove participants can enter and
the session chairs are then responsible for giving people a chance to
speak. Works reasonably well, I'd say :)

-Toke


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-10 22:43                       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
@ 2021-06-11  2:59                         ` Willy Tarreau
  2021-06-11  9:13                           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Willy Tarreau @ 2021-06-11  2:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  Cc: Shuah Khan, Steven Rostedt, Laurent Pinchart,
	Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult,
	David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter,
	Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 12:43:05AM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> writes:
> > 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.
> 
> This is basically how IETF meetings function: At the beginning of every
> session, a volunteer "jabber scribe" is selected to watch the chat and
> relay any questions to a microphone in the room. And the video streaming
> platform has a "virtual queue" that remove participants can enter and
> the session chairs are then responsible for giving people a chance to
> speak. Works reasonably well, I'd say :)

I was about to say the same. In addition, local participants line up
at a microphone and do not interrupt the speaker, but the organiser
gives them the signal to ask a question. This allows to maintain a
good balance between local and remote participants. Also it's common
to see some locals go back to their seat because someone else just
asked the same question. And when remote questions are asked using
pure text, it's easy for the organiser to skip them if already
responded as well.

This method is rather efficient because it doesn't require to keep the
questions for the end of the session, yet questions do not interrupt
the speaker. It also solves the problem of people not speaking in the
microphone. The only thing is that it can be quite intimidating for
local participants who are too shy of standing up in front of a
microphone and everyone else.

Just my two cents,
Willy

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-11  2:59                         ` Willy Tarreau
@ 2021-06-11  9:13                           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
  2021-06-11  9:51                             ` Willy Tarreau
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 32+ messages in thread
From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab @ 2021-06-11  9:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Willy Tarreau
  Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen, Shuah Khan, Steven Rostedt,
	Laurent Pinchart, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt,
	metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH,
	Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit,
	linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev,
	linux-arch, linux-api

Em Fri, 11 Jun 2021 04:59:42 +0200
Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> escreveu:

> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 12:43:05AM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> > Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> writes:  
> > > 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.  
> > 
> > This is basically how IETF meetings function: At the beginning of every
> > session, a volunteer "jabber scribe" is selected to watch the chat and
> > relay any questions to a microphone in the room. And the video streaming
> > platform has a "virtual queue" that remove participants can enter and
> > the session chairs are then responsible for giving people a chance to
> > speak. Works reasonably well, I'd say :)  
> 
> I was about to say the same. In addition, local participants line up
> at a microphone and do not interrupt the speaker, but the organiser
> gives them the signal to ask a question. This allows to maintain a
> good balance between local and remote participants. Also it's common
> to see some locals go back to their seat because someone else just
> asked the same question. And when remote questions are asked using
> pure text, it's easy for the organiser to skip them if already
> responded as well.
> 
> This method is rather efficient because it doesn't require to keep the
> questions for the end of the session, yet questions do not interrupt
> the speaker. It also solves the problem of people not speaking in the
> microphone. The only thing is that it can be quite intimidating for
> local participants who are too shy of standing up in front of a
> microphone and everyone else.

If someone is shy, he/she could simply type the question as a
remote participant would do.

This should work fine for a normal speech, but for BoFs and the
usual "round table" discussions we have at Kernel Maintainers,
this may not work well for local participants.

I guess that, for such kind of discussions, I can see two
possible alternatives:

1. everyone would use their laptop cameras/mics;
2. every round table would have their on camera/mic set.

(1) is probably simpler to implement, but may provide a worse
experience for local participants. (2) is probably harder to
implement, as the usual conference logistics company may not
have cameras.

In either case, a moderator (or some moderating software) is needed
in order queue requests for speech. So, basically, when someone
(either in a table or remote) wants to speak, it adds its name to
a queue, which will then be parsed at the queue's order. This is not
as natural as a physical meeting, but I guess it won't bring too
much burden to local people.

Thanks,
Mauro

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-11  9:13                           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
@ 2021-06-11  9:51                             ` Willy Tarreau
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Willy Tarreau @ 2021-06-11  9:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mauro Carvalho Chehab
  Cc: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen, Shuah Khan, Steven Rostedt,
	Laurent Pinchart, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt,
	metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, James Bottomley, Greg KH,
	Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit,
	linux-kernel, linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev,
	linux-arch, linux-api

On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 11:13:07AM +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > The only thing is that it can be quite intimidating for
> > local participants who are too shy of standing up in front of a
> > microphone and everyone else.
> 
> If someone is shy, he/she could simply type the question as a
> remote participant would do.

+1

> This should work fine for a normal speech, but for BoFs and the
> usual "round table" discussions we have at Kernel Maintainers,
> this may not work well for local participants.

Indeed but for this one the problem is the same with those who are
not much at ease with oral english. It's difficult to insert oneself
into a discussion flow between multiple people speaking fast and
naturally understanding what they're saying without having to think.
So this situation is not new, and actually this ability to interact
quickly is what makes such events profitable to a group, even if not
everyone can participate at the same level.

In such a case, it's the moderator's job to observe that some people
want to say something and probably need a second or two of silence and
concentration first. And this works both for local and remote ones.

Willy

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-06-09 19:23             ` James Bottomley
@ 2021-06-11 10:58               ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2021-06-11 10:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: James Bottomley, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter
  Cc: Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

On 09.06.21 21:23, James Bottomley wrote:

> but the US is definitely moving
> to a regime that says once you're vaccinated it's pretty much over for

As far as I see (watching from the other side of the globe), for most
states it already is over, no matter whether somebody got a shot or not.
(actually, getting reports of people *with* the shot get increasing
trouble, eg. kept out of stores, schools, planes, ...).

FL and TX seem to be the most relaxed states in this regard.
Maybe ask DeStantis and Abbot whether they'd support such a conference
in their states, maybe they'd even open their cheque books ;-)

> you and I don't see a problem with taking advantage of that for hybrid
> style events.  However, even with the best will in the world, I can't
> see much of a way around the problem that remote people at hybrid
> events will always be at a disadvantage ... suggestions for improving
> this are always welcome.

Looking from a totally different angle, I believe the hybrid approach
could even be a benefit. For example, longer talks - IMHO - are easier
to do (and for the audience) when just recorded, so people can listen to
them any time (and as often one wants to). Spontanous questions right
after, I guess, are only helpful for a small minority that's already 
deep in that particular topic - in those cases I'd prefer a more 
personal conversation. Another scenario are expert working groups, where
people already involved into certain topic talk closely - IMHO something
where direct (group) calls are a good medium, and probably working
better outside the strict time frames of such an event.

Maybe it's good idea to jump back to square one and ask the question,
what people actually expect from and try to achieve from such an event,
before going into some actual planning. (I could only express my very
personal view, but that's probably far from being representative)


--mtx

-- 
---
Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert
werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off
  2021-05-28 14:58         ` James Bottomley
  2021-05-28 15:11           ` Matthew Wilcox
  2021-06-09 10:37           ` David Hildenbrand
@ 2021-06-11 11:10           ` David Howells
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 32+ messages in thread
From: David Howells @ 2021-06-11 11:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Matthew Wilcox
  Cc: dhowells, James Bottomley, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter,
	Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, linux-kernel,
	linux-block, linux-fsdevel, linux-mm, netdev, linux-arch,
	linux-api

Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote:

> Umm.  Let's remember that the vaccines are 33-93% effective [1],
> which means that there's approximately a 100% certainty that at least
> one person arriving at the event from a trans-atlantic flight has been
> exposed to someone who has the virus.  I'm not convinced that holding a
> "more relaxed protocol" event is a great idea.

One thing that concerns me about flying to the US is going through multiple
busy international airports - take Heathrow which didn't separate incoming
travellers from red-listed countries from those of amber- or green- until like
a week ago.

Would it be practical/economical to charter a plane to fly, say, from a less
busy airport in Europe to a less busy airport in the US and back again if we
could get enough delegates together to make it worthwhile?

Chartering seems to be costed on miles flown rather than passenger count, but
I've only looked into it very briefly.

David


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 32+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 32+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-04-19 15:28 Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off Theodore Ts'o
2021-04-28 10:29 ` Jiri Kosina
2021-04-30 21:48   ` Theodore Ts'o
2021-05-27 13:23     ` Christoph Lameter
2021-05-27 13:29       ` Greg KH
2021-05-28 14:58         ` James Bottomley
2021-05-28 15:11           ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-05-28 15:27             ` James Bottomley
2021-05-28 15:31               ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-05-28 15:44                 ` James Bottomley
2021-05-28 15:55                   ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-05-28 16:04                     ` James Bottomley
2021-05-28 16:31                       ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-05-28 15:42             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-06-09 10:37           ` David Hildenbrand
2021-06-09 19:23             ` James Bottomley
2021-06-11 10:58               ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2021-06-10 18:07             ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
2021-06-10 18:23               ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-10 18:39                 ` Laurent Pinchart
2021-06-10 19:26                   ` Steven Rostedt
2021-06-10 19:55                     ` Shuah Khan
2021-06-10 20:02                       ` Steven Rostedt
2021-06-10 20:20                         ` Matthew Wilcox
2021-06-10 20:31                           ` Steven Rostedt
2021-06-10 22:43                       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-06-11  2:59                         ` Willy Tarreau
2021-06-11  9:13                           ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab
2021-06-11  9:51                             ` Willy Tarreau
2021-06-10 20:12                   ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
2021-06-10 18:55               ` Linus Torvalds
2021-06-11 11:10           ` David Howells

Linux Kernel Summit discussions

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/ksummit/0 ksummit/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 ksummit ksummit/ https://lore.kernel.org/ksummit \
		ksummit@lists.linux.dev
	public-inbox-index ksummit

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/dev.linux.lists.ksummit


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git