* 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 ` (2 more replies) 2021-06-11 11:10 ` David Howells 2 siblings, 3 replies; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 2021-06-18 13:34 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 2021-06-18 13:34 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2 siblings, 2 replies; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 0 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 0 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 2021-06-18 13:46 ` Laurent Pinchart 2 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 2021-06-18 13:46 ` Laurent Pinchart 2 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 @ 2021-06-18 13:46 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-18 14:11 ` James Bottomley 2021-06-22 22:33 ` Shuah Khan 2 siblings, 2 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-18 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Shuah Khan Cc: Steven Rostedt, 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 Hi Shuah, On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > >> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site > >> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of conferences, by > >> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. This is > >> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the conference > >> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V > >> equipment than usual ? > > > > I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the > > understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am), > > is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be > > "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is going > > on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless > > you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that > > will just destroy the conference IMO. > > > > That said, I think we should add more to make the communication better > > for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs > > followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote > > attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might > > have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and > > beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a discussion > > with the remote attendees. > > > > The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees can > > at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If > > video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where they > > can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations. > > > > You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time > participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a > couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience > without restricting in-person experience. > > - Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to enable > remote participants to chime in and participate. > - Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go unnoticed and > enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in person. > > It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for > sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees. A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at *your* shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from time to time :-)). For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger number of microphones in the room than usual. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 13:46 ` Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-18 14:11 ` James Bottomley 2021-06-18 14:17 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-22 22:33 ` Shuah Khan 1 sibling, 2 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2021-06-18 14:11 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan Cc: Steven Rostedt, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, 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, 2021-06-18 at 16:46 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier > to participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking > in microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need > to enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a > larger number of microphones in the room than usual. Plumbers has been pretty good at that. Even before remote participation, if people don't speak into the mic, it's not captured on the recording, so we've spent ages developing protocols for this. Mostly centred around having someone in the room to remind everyone to speak into the mic and easily throwable padded mic boxes. Ironically, this is the detail that meant we couldn't hold Plumbers in person under the current hotel protocols ... the mic needs sanitizing after each throw. James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:11 ` James Bottomley @ 2021-06-18 14:17 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 14:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, 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, 18 Jun 2021 07:11:44 -0700 James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 16:46 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier > > to participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking > > in microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need > > to enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a > > larger number of microphones in the room than usual. > > Plumbers has been pretty good at that. Even before remote > participation, if people don't speak into the mic, it's not captured on > the recording, so we've spent ages developing protocols for this. > Mostly centred around having someone in the room to remind everyone to > speak into the mic and easily throwable padded mic boxes. Ironically, > this is the detail that meant we couldn't hold Plumbers in person under > the current hotel protocols ... the mic needs sanitizing after each > throw. > Plumbers also has the advantage of having a throwable mic. And not just one of them, we have two and a normal mic as well as a lavalier mic. Having someone running around the audience passing the mic is not very efficient, and having to get up and stand at a microphone, may be too intimidating for some. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:11 ` James Bottomley 2021-06-18 14:17 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 14:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:46 ` James Bottomley 1 sibling, 2 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2021-06-18 14:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: James Bottomley Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Steven Rostedt, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:11 PM James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote: > On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 16:46 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier > > to participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking > > in microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need > > to enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a > > larger number of microphones in the room than usual. > > Plumbers has been pretty good at that. Even before remote > participation, if people don't speak into the mic, it's not captured on > the recording, so we've spent ages developing protocols for this. > Mostly centred around having someone in the room to remind everyone to > speak into the mic and easily throwable padded mic boxes. Ironically, > this is the detail that meant we couldn't hold Plumbers in person under > the current hotel protocols ... the mic needs sanitizing after each > throw. What about letting people use the personal mic they're already carrying, i.e. a phone? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2021-06-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:45 ` Laurent Pinchart ` (2 more replies) 2021-06-18 14:46 ` James Bottomley 1 sibling, 3 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 14:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:28:02 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > carrying, i.e. a phone? Interesting idea. I wonder how well that would work in practice. Are all phones good enough to prevent echo? It is something that needs to be tested out first before making it officially used. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 14:45 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-18 14:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 15:58 ` Mark Brown 2 siblings, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-18 14:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, James Bottomley, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 10:32:14AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:28:02 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > > carrying, i.e. a phone? > > Interesting idea. > > I wonder how well that would work in practice. Are all phones good > enough to prevent echo? That could be solved by isolating attendees in different rooms. That way people could even attend remotely. Oh, wait... :-) > It is something that needs to be tested out first before making it > officially used. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:45 ` Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-18 14:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 15:14 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-18 15:58 ` Mark Brown 2 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2021-06-18 14:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API Hi Steven, On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:32 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:28:02 +0200 > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > > carrying, i.e. a phone? > > Interesting idea. > > I wonder how well that would work in practice. Are all phones good > enough to prevent echo? I deliberately didn't say anything about a speaker ;-) Just use the mic, with a simple (web) app only doing audio input? Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2021-06-18 15:14 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-18 15:23 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 15:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 0 siblings, 2 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2021-06-18 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Steven Rostedt, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 04:58:08PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Steven, > > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:32 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:28:02 +0200 > > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > > > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > > > carrying, i.e. a phone? > > > > Interesting idea. > > > > I wonder how well that would work in practice. Are all phones good > > enough to prevent echo? > > I deliberately didn't say anything about a speaker ;-) There's usually a speaker in the room so everyone can hear the question ... ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 15:14 ` Matthew Wilcox @ 2021-06-18 15:23 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 15:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:14:26 +0100 Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote: > > I deliberately didn't say anything about a speaker ;-) > > There's usually a speaker in the room so everyone can hear the question > ... Right, that's what I was thinking. Not the phone having a speaker, but the room having one. Otherwise, remote attendees wont be able to participate. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 15:14 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-18 15:23 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 15:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 15:34 ` Steven Rostedt 1 sibling, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2021-06-18 15:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Steven Rostedt, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 5:15 PM Matthew Wilcox <willy@infradead.org> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 04:58:08PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:32 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:28:02 +0200 > > > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > > > > > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > > > > carrying, i.e. a phone? > > > > > > Interesting idea. > > > > > > I wonder how well that would work in practice. Are all phones good > > > enough to prevent echo? > > > > I deliberately didn't say anything about a speaker ;-) > > There's usually a speaker in the room so everyone can hear the question > ... Oh IC. I meant that not using the speaker on the phone, there cannot be any feedback from the phone speaker to the phone mic. W.r.t. the other speaker in the room, isn't that similar to the normal mic, and can't that be handled at the receiving side? There will be a bit more delay involved, though. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 15:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2021-06-18 15:34 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 15:36 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 16:33 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab 0 siblings, 2 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 15:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Matthew Wilcox, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:29:04 +0200 Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > W.r.t. the other speaker in the room, isn't that similar to the normal mic, > and can't that be handled at the receiving side? > There will be a bit more delay involved, though. How many times have you been in a conference where the normal mic and speaker caused a nasty feedback loop? I'm not sure how well phone mics and room speakers will work. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 15:34 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 15:36 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 16:33 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 15:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Matthew Wilcox, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:34:52 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote: > How many times have you been in a conference where the normal mic and > speaker caused a nasty feedback loop? > > I'm not sure how well phone mics and room speakers will work. BTW, Don't take these criticisms as a rejection of your idea. I actually like the idea. But to implement it, we need to go through all the scenarios that will likely go wrong, if we want it to work. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 15:34 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 15:36 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 16:33 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab @ 2021-06-18 16:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, Matthew Wilcox, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API Em Fri, 18 Jun 2021 11:34:52 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> escreveu: > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 17:29:04 +0200 > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > W.r.t. the other speaker in the room, isn't that similar to the normal mic, > > and can't that be handled at the receiving side? > > There will be a bit more delay involved, though. > > How many times have you been in a conference where the normal mic and > speaker caused a nasty feedback loop? I never used, but there are some devices that can work as automatic feedback suppressors. They basically detect a feedback loop and add notch filter(s) to the frequency(ies) that are looping. Some high-end digital mixers have this feature embedded (but the operator may need to enable it). Yet, you may still hear the feedback loop while the algorithm is detecting and correcting the issue, as it takes 100 ms to 400ms to detect and filter a single feedback frequency. > I'm not sure how well phone mics and room speakers will work. I guess that this depends on how the environment is setup. A good digital mixer can be set with a gate threshold. If the volume is below the threshold, the mic will be muted. They can also be setup to have just one microphone group, where only one microphone will have the volume raised on a given time. So, if someone speaks on a mic, all the others are muted or attenuated. Yet, I guess this is not the usual "package" provided by hotels. Those setups may require extra devices and technical people that knows now to use such features. Thanks, Mauro ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:45 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-18 14:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven @ 2021-06-18 15:58 ` Mark Brown 2021-06-18 16:45 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab 2 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Mark Brown @ 2021-06-18 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Steven Rostedt Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 771 bytes --] On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 10:32:14AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:28:02 +0200 > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > > carrying, i.e. a phone? > Interesting idea. > I wonder how well that would work in practice. Are all phones good > enough to prevent echo? Unless you get the latency for the WebRTC<->in room speaker down lower than I'd expect it to be I'd expect echo cancellation to have fun, though beam forming might reject a lot of in room noise including that - higher end modern phones are astonishingly good at this stuff. I'd not trust it to work reliably for all attendees though, it's the sort of thing where you'll get lots of per device variation. [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 15:58 ` Mark Brown @ 2021-06-18 16:45 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab 0 siblings, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Mauro Carvalho Chehab @ 2021-06-18 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Mark Brown Cc: Steven Rostedt, Geert Uytterhoeven, James Bottomley, Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API Em Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:58:29 +0100 Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> escreveu: > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 10:32:14AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Jun 2021 16:28:02 +0200 > > Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org> wrote: > > > > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > > > carrying, i.e. a phone? > > > Interesting idea. > > > I wonder how well that would work in practice. Are all phones good > > enough to prevent echo? > > Unless you get the latency for the WebRTC<->in room speaker down lower > than I'd expect it to be I'd expect echo cancellation to have fun, > though beam forming might reject a lot of in room noise including that - > higher end modern phones are astonishingly good at this stuff. I'd not > trust it to work reliably for all attendees though, it's the sort of > thing where you'll get lots of per device variation. The local audience should be listening to the in-room audio, in order to avoid echo. Also, all local mics should be muted, if someone is speaking from a remote location. Yet, echo is unavoidable if a remote participant is speaking while listening to the audio without headphones. If this ever happens, I guess the moderator should cut the remote audio and ask the remote participant to lower their speakers or use a headphone. Thanks, Mauro ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 14:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 14:46 ` James Bottomley 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: James Bottomley @ 2021-06-18 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Geert Uytterhoeven Cc: Laurent Pinchart, Shuah Khan, Steven Rostedt, Konstantin Ryabitsev, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Hildenbrand, Greg KH, Christoph Lameter, Theodore Ts'o, Jiri Kosina, ksummit, Linux Kernel Mailing List, linux-block, Linux FS Devel, Linux MM, netdev, Linux-Arch, Linux API On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 16:28 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 4:11 PM James Bottomley > <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2021-06-18 at 16:46 +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest > > > barrier to participation for remote attendees is local attendees > > > not speaking in microphones. That's the number one rule that > > > moderators would need to enforce, I think all the rest depends on > > > it. This may require a larger number of microphones in the room > > > than usual. > > > > Plumbers has been pretty good at that. Even before remote > > participation, if people don't speak into the mic, it's not > > captured on the recording, so we've spent ages developing protocols > > for this. Mostly centred around having someone in the room to > > remind everyone to speak into the mic and easily throwable padded > > mic boxes. Ironically, this is the detail that meant we couldn't > > hold Plumbers in person under the current hotel protocols ... the > > mic needs sanitizing after each throw. > > What about letting people use the personal mic they're already > carrying, i.e. a phone? Well, you can already in our hybrid plan: BBB works on a phone as a web app, so you'd appear in the conference as a remote attendee even though you're sitting in the room. However, not everyone's phone will run the app, so we still need the throwable solution. The main problem with using this method is that you're going to have to mute the phone speaker output to prevent audio feedback, but I'm sure we'll only get that wrong a few times before people work it out ... James ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 13:46 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-18 14:11 ` James Bottomley @ 2021-06-22 22:33 ` Shuah Khan 2021-06-22 22:59 ` Laurent Pinchart 1 sibling, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Shuah Khan @ 2021-06-22 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: Steven Rostedt, 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 6/18/21 7:46 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Shuah, > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> >>>> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site >>>> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of conferences, by >>>> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. This is >>>> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the conference >>>> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V >>>> equipment than usual ? >>> >>> I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the >>> understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am), >>> is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be >>> "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is going >>> on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless >>> you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that >>> will just destroy the conference IMO. >>> >>> That said, I think we should add more to make the communication better >>> for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs >>> followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote >>> attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might >>> have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and >>> beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a discussion >>> with the remote attendees. >>> >>> The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees can >>> at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If >>> video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where they >>> can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations. >>> >> >> You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time >> participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a >> couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience >> without restricting in-person experience. >> >> - Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to enable >> remote participants to chime in and participate. >> - Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go unnoticed and >> enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in person. >> >> It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for >> sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees. > > A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very > good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a > screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the > room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and > an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at *your* > shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker > nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from > time to time :-)). > > For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to > participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in > microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to > enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger > number of microphones in the room than usual. > Absolutely. Moderator has to make sure the following things happen for this to be effective: - Watch chat and Q&A, Raise hand from remote participants - Enforce some kind of taking turns to allow fairness in participation - Have the speaker repeat questions asked in the room (we do that now in some talks - both remote and in-person - chat and Q&A needs reading out for recording) - Explore live Transcription features available in the virtual conf. platform. You still need humans watching the transcription. - Have a running session notes combined with transcription. Any of these options aren't sustainable when large number of people are participating remotely or in-person. In general a small number of people participate either in person or remote in any case, based on my observation in remote and in-person settings. Maybe we can experiment with one or two workshops this time around and see how it works out. If we can figure an effective way, it would be beneficial for people that can't travel for one reason or the other. thanks, -- Shuah ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-22 22:33 ` Shuah Khan @ 2021-06-22 22:59 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-22 23:33 ` Shuah Khan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-22 22:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Shuah Khan Cc: Steven Rostedt, 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 Hi Shuah, On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 04:33:22PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 6/18/21 7:46 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > >> On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>> > >>>> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site > >>>> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of conferences, by > >>>> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. This is > >>>> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the conference > >>>> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V > >>>> equipment than usual ? > >>> > >>> I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the > >>> understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am), > >>> is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be > >>> "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is going > >>> on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless > >>> you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that > >>> will just destroy the conference IMO. > >>> > >>> That said, I think we should add more to make the communication better > >>> for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs > >>> followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote > >>> attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might > >>> have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and > >>> beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a discussion > >>> with the remote attendees. > >>> > >>> The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees can > >>> at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If > >>> video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where they > >>> can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations. > >>> > >> > >> You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time > >> participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a > >> couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience > >> without restricting in-person experience. > >> > >> - Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to enable > >> remote participants to chime in and participate. > >> - Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go unnoticed and > >> enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in person. > >> > >> It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for > >> sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees. > > > > A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very > > good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a > > screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the > > room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and > > an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at *your* > > shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker > > nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from > > time to time :-)). > > > > For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to > > participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in > > microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to > > enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger > > number of microphones in the room than usual. > > > > Absolutely. Moderator has to make sure the following things happen for > this to be effective: > > - Watch chat and Q&A, Raise hand from remote participants > - Enforce some kind of taking turns to allow fairness in > participation > - Have the speaker repeat questions asked in the room (we do that now > in some talks - both remote and in-person - chat and Q&A needs > reading out for recording) > - Explore live Transcription features available in the virtual conf. > platform. You still need humans watching the transcription. > - Have a running session notes combined with transcription. > > Any of these options aren't sustainable when large number of people > are participating remotely or in-person. In general a small number of > people participate either in person or remote in any case, based on > my observation in remote and in-person settings. > > Maybe we can experiment with one or two workshops this time around > and see how it works out. If we can figure an effective way, it would > be beneficial for people that can't travel for one reason or the > other. Can we nominate moderators ahead of time ? For workshop-style discussions, they need to be a person who won't participate actively in the discussions, as it's impossible to both contribute and moderate at the same time. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-22 22:59 ` Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-22 23:33 ` Shuah Khan 2021-06-22 23:57 ` Shuah Khan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Shuah Khan @ 2021-06-22 23:33 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: Steven Rostedt, 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 6/22/21 4:59 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Shuah, > > On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 04:33:22PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >> On 6/18/21 7:46 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>> On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>>>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site >>>>>> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of conferences, by >>>>>> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. This is >>>>>> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the conference >>>>>> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V >>>>>> equipment than usual ? >>>>> >>>>> I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the >>>>> understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am), >>>>> is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be >>>>> "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is going >>>>> on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless >>>>> you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that >>>>> will just destroy the conference IMO. >>>>> >>>>> That said, I think we should add more to make the communication better >>>>> for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs >>>>> followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote >>>>> attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might >>>>> have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and >>>>> beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a discussion >>>>> with the remote attendees. >>>>> >>>>> The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees can >>>>> at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If >>>>> video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where they >>>>> can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time >>>> participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a >>>> couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience >>>> without restricting in-person experience. >>>> >>>> - Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to enable >>>> remote participants to chime in and participate. >>>> - Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go unnoticed and >>>> enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in person. >>>> >>>> It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for >>>> sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees. >>> >>> A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very >>> good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a >>> screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the >>> room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and >>> an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at *your* >>> shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker >>> nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from >>> time to time :-)). >>> >>> For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to >>> participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in >>> microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to >>> enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger >>> number of microphones in the room than usual. >>> >> >> Absolutely. Moderator has to make sure the following things happen for >> this to be effective: >> >> - Watch chat and Q&A, Raise hand from remote participants >> - Enforce some kind of taking turns to allow fairness in >> participation >> - Have the speaker repeat questions asked in the room (we do that now >> in some talks - both remote and in-person - chat and Q&A needs >> reading out for recording) >> - Explore live Transcription features available in the virtual conf. >> platform. You still need humans watching the transcription. >> - Have a running session notes combined with transcription. >> >> Any of these options aren't sustainable when large number of people >> are participating remotely or in-person. In general a small number of >> people participate either in person or remote in any case, based on >> my observation in remote and in-person settings. >> >> Maybe we can experiment with one or two workshops this time around >> and see how it works out. If we can figure an effective way, it would >> be beneficial for people that can't travel for one reason or the >> other. > > Can we nominate moderators ahead of time ? For workshop-style > discussions, they need to be a person who won't participate actively in > the discussions, as it's impossible to both contribute and moderate at > the same time. > Correct. It will be impossible to participate and moderate in workshop setting. We have to ask for volunteers and nominate moderators ahead of time. thanks, -- Shuah ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-22 23:33 ` Shuah Khan @ 2021-06-22 23:57 ` Shuah Khan 2021-06-23 0:06 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-23 0:15 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 2 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Shuah Khan @ 2021-06-22 23:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Laurent Pinchart Cc: Steven Rostedt, 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 6/22/21 5:33 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 6/22/21 4:59 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >> Hi Shuah, >> >> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 04:33:22PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >>> On 6/18/21 7:46 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: >>>>> On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: >>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site >>>>>>> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of >>>>>>> conferences, by >>>>>>> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. >>>>>>> This is >>>>>>> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the >>>>>>> conference >>>>>>> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V >>>>>>> equipment than usual ? >>>>>> >>>>>> I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the >>>>>> understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am), >>>>>> is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be >>>>>> "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is >>>>>> going >>>>>> on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless >>>>>> you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that >>>>>> will just destroy the conference IMO. >>>>>> >>>>>> That said, I think we should add more to make the communication >>>>>> better >>>>>> for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs >>>>>> followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote >>>>>> attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might >>>>>> have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and >>>>>> beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a >>>>>> discussion >>>>>> with the remote attendees. >>>>>> >>>>>> The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees >>>>>> can >>>>>> at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If >>>>>> video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where >>>>>> they >>>>>> can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time >>>>> participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a >>>>> couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience >>>>> without restricting in-person experience. >>>>> >>>>> - Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to >>>>> enable >>>>> remote participants to chime in and participate. >>>>> - Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go >>>>> unnoticed and >>>>> enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in >>>>> person. >>>>> >>>>> It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for >>>>> sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees. >>>> >>>> A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very >>>> good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a >>>> screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the >>>> room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and >>>> an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at >>>> *your* >>>> shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker >>>> nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from >>>> time to time :-)). >>>> >>>> For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to >>>> participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in >>>> microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to >>>> enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger >>>> number of microphones in the room than usual. >>>> >>> >>> Absolutely. Moderator has to make sure the following things happen for >>> this to be effective: >>> >>> - Watch chat and Q&A, Raise hand from remote participants >>> - Enforce some kind of taking turns to allow fairness in >>> participation >>> - Have the speaker repeat questions asked in the room (we do that now >>> in some talks - both remote and in-person - chat and Q&A needs >>> reading out for recording) >>> - Explore live Transcription features available in the virtual conf. >>> platform. You still need humans watching the transcription. >>> - Have a running session notes combined with transcription. >>> >>> Any of these options aren't sustainable when large number of people >>> are participating remotely or in-person. In general a small number of >>> people participate either in person or remote in any case, based on >>> my observation in remote and in-person settings. >>> >>> Maybe we can experiment with one or two workshops this time around >>> and see how it works out. If we can figure an effective way, it would >>> be beneficial for people that can't travel for one reason or the >>> other. >> >> Can we nominate moderators ahead of time ? For workshop-style >> discussions, they need to be a person who won't participate actively in >> the discussions, as it's impossible to both contribute and moderate at >> the same time. >> > > Correct. It will be impossible to participate and moderate in workshop > setting. We have to ask for volunteers and nominate moderators ahead of > time. > Subsystems could seek volunteers from other subsystems perhaps ... thanks, -- Shuah ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-22 23:57 ` Shuah Khan @ 2021-06-23 0:06 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-23 0:15 ` Steven Rostedt 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-23 0:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Shuah Khan Cc: Steven Rostedt, 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 Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 05:57:11PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 6/22/21 5:33 PM, Shuah Khan wrote: > > On 6/22/21 4:59 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 04:33:22PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > >>> On 6/18/21 7:46 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > >>>>> On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote: > >>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site > >>>>>>> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of conferences, by > >>>>>>> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. This is > >>>>>>> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the conference > >>>>>>> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V > >>>>>>> equipment than usual ? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the > >>>>>> understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am), > >>>>>> is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be > >>>>>> "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is going > >>>>>> on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless > >>>>>> you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that > >>>>>> will just destroy the conference IMO. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> That said, I think we should add more to make the communication better > >>>>>> for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs > >>>>>> followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote > >>>>>> attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might > >>>>>> have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and > >>>>>> beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a discussion > >>>>>> with the remote attendees. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees can > >>>>>> at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If > >>>>>> video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where they > >>>>>> can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time > >>>>> participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a > >>>>> couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience > >>>>> without restricting in-person experience. > >>>>> > >>>>> - Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to enable > >>>>> remote participants to chime in and participate. > >>>>> - Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go unnoticed and > >>>>> enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in person. > >>>>> > >>>>> It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for > >>>>> sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees. > >>>> > >>>> A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very > >>>> good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a > >>>> screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the > >>>> room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and > >>>> an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at *your* > >>>> shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker > >>>> nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from > >>>> time to time :-)). > >>>> > >>>> For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to > >>>> participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in > >>>> microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to > >>>> enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger > >>>> number of microphones in the room than usual. > >>> > >>> Absolutely. Moderator has to make sure the following things happen for > >>> this to be effective: > >>> > >>> - Watch chat and Q&A, Raise hand from remote participants > >>> - Enforce some kind of taking turns to allow fairness in > >>> participation > >>> - Have the speaker repeat questions asked in the room (we do that now > >>> in some talks - both remote and in-person - chat and Q&A needs > >>> reading out for recording) > >>> - Explore live Transcription features available in the virtual conf. > >>> platform. You still need humans watching the transcription. > >>> - Have a running session notes combined with transcription. > >>> > >>> Any of these options aren't sustainable when large number of people > >>> are participating remotely or in-person. In general a small number of > >>> people participate either in person or remote in any case, based on > >>> my observation in remote and in-person settings. > >>> > >>> Maybe we can experiment with one or two workshops this time around > >>> and see how it works out. If we can figure an effective way, it would > >>> be beneficial for people that can't travel for one reason or the > >>> other. > >> > >> Can we nominate moderators ahead of time ? For workshop-style > >> discussions, they need to be a person who won't participate actively in > >> the discussions, as it's impossible to both contribute and moderate at > >> the same time. > > > > Correct. It will be impossible to participate and moderate in workshop > > setting. We have to ask for volunteers and nominate moderators ahead of > > time. > > Subsystems could seek volunteers from other subsystems perhaps ... That's a good idea, and it's a great way to learn about other parts of the kernel (or other open-source projects). This would need to be taken into account when scheduling workshops though. I'd like to also propose giving official recognition of the important role of moderators, for instance by extending the speaker's gift scheme to moderators (no personal interest here as I won't attend the conference in person and thus can't be a moderator, and it's an easy to make suggestion for me as I don't manage conference budgets :-)). -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-22 23:57 ` Shuah Khan 2021-06-23 0:06 ` Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-23 0:15 ` Steven Rostedt 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-23 0:15 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 Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:57:11 -0600 Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > Correct. It will be impossible to participate and moderate in workshop > > setting. We have to ask for volunteers and nominate moderators ahead of > > time. > > > > Subsystems could seek volunteers from other subsystems perhaps ... Right, this is exactly what I was thinking. I could moderate a GPU subsystem, and even though I'm know for speaking, I would keep my mouth shut for such a session, as I'm totally clueless when it comes to the GPU subsystem ;-) -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ 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; 59+ 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] 59+ 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 @ 2021-06-18 13:34 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-18 14:08 ` Steven Rostedt 2 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2021-06-18 13:34 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: > Just make sure to not > ignore the poor souls that really won't be traveling this year, because > "we are not vaccinated". That's NOT correct. People can't travel freely because OPPRESSIVE regimes all around the world forbid traveling freely - and enforcing that with brute force. Last year, i've been gunpointed by a cop just for walking over a market place in Nuremberg with my family, wearing a shirt with some Tucholsky quote and having my hands in the pants pockets ! It is NOT the unvaxed who are stopping anybody from travel - it is nobody else than the GOVERMENT and its compliant abettors. US americans should remind themselves of the 2nd amendment. --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] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-18 13:34 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2021-06-18 14:08 ` Steven Rostedt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Steven Rostedt @ 2021-06-18 14:08 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 Fri, 18 Jun 2021 15:34:19 +0200 "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@metux.net> wrote: > US americans should remind themselves of the 2nd amendment. This is not the place to have this discussion. Please stop. You are an active kernel developer, you should know better. Continuing this line of conversation will only guarantee that you will be placed in the /dev/null folder of many developers procmailrc filters. You will be for me, if you decide to continue this. -- Steve ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ 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 2021-06-15 18:23 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ 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] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-11 11:10 ` David Howells @ 2021-06-15 18:23 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-15 18:30 ` Matthew Wilcox 0 siblings, 1 reply; 59+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2021-06-15 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: David Howells, Matthew Wilcox Cc: 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 11.06.21 13:10, David Howells wrote: > 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? Wouldn't just taking prophylatic meds like CDS or HCQ and/or hi-dose vitamins (C, D3+K2) be way more cost effective and flexible than to charter a whole plane ? Don't have personal experience w/ HCQ yet, but CDS is pretty cheap and easy to use (prescription free). Of course, one should dig a bit into the specialist literature, before playing around - and take a few days for finding the right personal dose. especially when one's cumbered w/ parasites (herxheimer) --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] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-15 18:23 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2021-06-15 18:30 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-15 18:34 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev 2021-06-15 18:40 ` Laurent Pinchart 0 siblings, 2 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Matthew Wilcox @ 2021-06-15 18:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: David Howells, 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 Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 08:23:55PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 11.06.21 13:10, David Howells wrote: > > > 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? > > Wouldn't just taking prophylatic meds like CDS or HCQ and/or hi-dose > vitamins (C, D3+K2) be way more cost effective and flexible than to > charter a whole plane ? Why don't you just shine a bright light up your arse? It'll have the same effect. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-15 18:30 ` Matthew Wilcox @ 2021-06-15 18:34 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev 2021-06-15 18:40 ` Laurent Pinchart 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Konstantin Ryabitsev @ 2021-06-15 18:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Howells, 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 Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 07:30:00PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > Wouldn't just taking prophylatic meds like CDS or HCQ and/or hi-dose > > vitamins (C, D3+K2) be way more cost effective and flexible than to > > charter a whole plane ? > > Why don't you just shine a bright light up your arse? It'll have the > same effect. Please stop. I do not have ability to ban people across all cc'd lists, but I will for sure start adding people to block filters on the infra to which I have access if this wildly off-topic discussion continues and especially if things continue to deteriorate into name-calling. -K ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
* Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 2021-06-15 18:30 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-15 18:34 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev @ 2021-06-15 18:40 ` Laurent Pinchart 1 sibling, 0 replies; 59+ messages in thread From: Laurent Pinchart @ 2021-06-15 18:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Matthew Wilcox Cc: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, David Howells, 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 Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 07:30:00PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 08:23:55PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > On 11.06.21 13:10, David Howells wrote: > > > > > 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? > > > > Wouldn't just taking prophylatic meds like CDS or HCQ and/or hi-dose > > vitamins (C, D3+K2) be way more cost effective and flexible than to > > charter a whole plane ? > > Why don't you just shine a bright light up your arse? It'll have the > same effect. Could we please, as requested early on by Konstantin, restrict COVID19-related discussions on this mailing list solely to how it would impact travel to/from the conference ? For those who want to debate the merits of various medicines, feel free to create your own mailing list, or an IRC channel on Freenode. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 59+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-06-23 0:15 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 59+ 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 2021-06-18 13:46 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-18 14:11 ` James Bottomley 2021-06-18 14:17 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 14:32 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 14:45 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-18 14:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 15:14 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-18 15:23 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 15:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven 2021-06-18 15:34 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 15:36 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-18 16:33 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab 2021-06-18 15:58 ` Mark Brown 2021-06-18 16:45 ` Mauro Carvalho Chehab 2021-06-18 14:46 ` James Bottomley 2021-06-22 22:33 ` Shuah Khan 2021-06-22 22:59 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-22 23:33 ` Shuah Khan 2021-06-22 23:57 ` Shuah Khan 2021-06-23 0:06 ` Laurent Pinchart 2021-06-23 0:15 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-10 18:55 ` Linus Torvalds 2021-06-18 13:34 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-18 14:08 ` Steven Rostedt 2021-06-11 11:10 ` David Howells 2021-06-15 18:23 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2021-06-15 18:30 ` Matthew Wilcox 2021-06-15 18:34 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev 2021-06-15 18:40 ` Laurent Pinchart
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).