From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FFC3C2B9F4 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 23:57:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33E1B61166 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 23:57:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230044AbhFWAAA (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jun 2021 20:00:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33716 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229954AbhFVX7e (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Jun 2021 19:59:34 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x32f.google.com (mail-ot1-x32f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 093DEC061756 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:57:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32f.google.com with SMTP id v22-20020a0568301416b029044e2d8e855eso197734otp.8 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:57:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=D7+Up0CAAEZefc0Jamt+N5dptYxDIjwoUqn3slEq9v8=; b=Uy8cIxxtYAZbCKj3TUvARfA/lfKk6q1FwvIaBsuekhRHoCalqRzIIN6LHT5Nc5z0wh JMsCO4WSbgq5Xdc0HmW+Zi/GoSdjBPho9KVkVNdsmgE5Nwm1l6QnXtHkv3fCJ7tE7TeO ttFafoyBn2N/F0Q42Nd1ZT5/kcE5iNDJTwbog= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=D7+Up0CAAEZefc0Jamt+N5dptYxDIjwoUqn3slEq9v8=; b=eolefE4ouSxgJrmV/fFMYJXM+gXonTdPUTrI7mnQmXZ+5qc+xZVNfo3GXr2L4rjsuH TWpqz+UqbyFtOukChnKrHzRBfauN8MhMjDKkz6qPdDB4wwc19IVIRVZlStNBcNJxoBWt BS/Vp0mndv68T32GzpSLJZVaIbK66zKP10zaXMKAHGwsramdUt+bKOGBzUZ7d0agFups jRBeXIGrKvamol3AXumSXilP+RPyO1fxFKgyxXZrNxCvgScx8Ix4UFijSQ5c4PA1Yy/Q r0n5ojyTMQdZdL7xLn4si3DEo7/mfh9uMtA/jGi/WL/YuPNhbP/jn6cnfWJ9BR6vcbCy ctjA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531U9YgW2JC5PIgVGU2pQhu95QV4d8mcsbbuAgQ99fZYq3fG8NAn 6UFU40NHvtRaN2V15PmTUl6pPw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxo0abcmkMh0h846zDctUjCWzZmT87/FjmvbdhTt7cXD01Nv+hfcB0Y5TTvGRv9BDiZnkMR9A== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:585:: with SMTP id 5mr5446428otd.12.1624406233379; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:57:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.112] (c-24-9-64-241.hsd1.co.comcast.net. [24.9.64.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r14sm4544855oie.43.2021.06.22.16.57.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:57:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off 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@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan References: <5038827c-463f-232d-4dec-da56c71089bd@metux.net> <20210610182318.jrxe3avfhkqq7xqn@nitro.local> <20210610152633.7e4a7304@oasis.local.home> <37e8d1a5-7c32-8e77-bb05-f851c87a1004@linuxfoundation.org> <3bfbe45c-2356-6db0-e1b8-11b7e37ae858@linuxfoundation.org> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: <66fce207-2602-6452-9216-01ebde656bcd@linuxfoundation.org> Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:57:11 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.8.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3bfbe45c-2356-6db0-e1b8-11b7e37ae858@linuxfoundation.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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