Re: Plumbers CF MCs

[Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>]

On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 12:35 PM Elena Zannoni <elena.zannoni@oracle.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/22/21 2:39 PM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
> > Hi Nick.
> >
> >> I saw plumbers opened call for microconferences:
> >> https://www.linuxplumbersconf.org/blog/2021/index.php/2021/03/18/cfp-open-microconferences/
> >>
> >> I was going to put together a submission; do we want to do a combined
> >> toolchain MC, or have distinct ones this year?
> >>
> >> I know in 2020 the GNU cauldron was co-located with Plumbers, as well
> >> as a GNU Tools Track MC and LLVM MC.
> > We are actually discussing in another thread about abusing LPC's
> > hospitality for another GNU Tools Track this year...
> >
> > Regarding the micro-conferences, I would be ok with either combined or
> > separated.  I think both approaches have their advantages.
> >
> > In either case I'm up for organizing the GNU part.
>
> Hi,
> yes, so, it looks like a GNU toolchain track will happen again this year
> at LPC (in lieu of the Cauldron conference).

Cool; I generally find these talks of more interest to me personally
than many of the kernel topics. It's nice to be able to attend (as an
LLVM developer).

> For the toolchain related MC, we should pick a better name than last
> year to avoid people getting confused between the MC and the track.
> Something like "toolchains and kernel intersection" or similar.

Oh, yeah, that's a great idea.

> I am neutral on whether it is with LLVM or separate. I guess it all
> depends on how long we want the MC to be.
> If there are enough topics for a double slot, you should request that
> sooner rather than towards the end, when there might be no extra slots
> left.

Sure, that sounds good.  Maybe we can have a CFP for the proposed MC,
and if we get enough interesting proposals that it doesn't look like
we'll be able to accomodate what we'd like, we can split into two MCs
(if we even need to cross that bridge; maybe we can fit everything
into the 4hrs for an MC).  I was going to propose a timeline for us to
make such decisions by, but I just checked and it seems that the
deadline for MCs is not yet posted:
https://linuxplumbersconf.org/event/11/abstracts/#submit-abstract,
which makes working backwards from there tricky.

Steven, sorry if I missed it, but can the conf organizers pick and
post a date for the deadline for Call-for-MC submissions? This might
help MC organizers plan for putting out their own CFPs, and planning
deadlines.  In our case, it would be figuring out whether one day vs
more (if possible) or splitting the MC in two is necessary by the
deadline.  It might not even be an issue at all this year, but I think
that's the only concern folks have about doing a single
kernel+toolchain MC (vs split like last year).

Or if there's other ideas here, folks should feel empowered to speak
up. Thanks all for the feedback so far.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers