Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Time to call it quits for the maintainer summit?
"Rafael J. Wysocki (Intel)" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.ksummit |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAJZ5v0jX+8a1OvovsiE8S8qazCeroGWo5-hdFkJ4mD_79r1hPw@mail.gmail.com> |
On Fri, Aug 7, 2026 at 1:41 AM Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, 06 Aug 2026 11:34:09 -0400 > James Bottomley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > there isn't really anything that would move the needle for a potential > > sponsor. Equally, there's nothing really that couldn't have been part > > of a wider discussion at Plumbers or LSF/MM, so I'm not sure there's > > anything that actually required discussion at this event (i.e. nothing > > to move the needle for kernel developers either). > > Well, I'm guessing that AI will be a big topic this year at MS. That alone > may drive up sponsorship! If the AI bubble doesn't pop before then, all we > need to do is market MS as an gathering of those that will influence AI on > the Linux kernel. ;-) > > > > As for fixes, one possibility is definitely keeping MS as is and moving > > the sponsor responsibility to Plumbers, but unless I can strap Linus > > down and sell companies on pitching to him directly, I fear that would > > end up creating a US$100k hole in our budget. Perhaps there are > > actually outcomes we could sell to sponsors but, because of the reduced > > audience, we simply don't get to hear about them ... so if you think > > that now would be the time to say what they are. Another solution that > > seems viable would be folding the MS into one of our existing sponsored > > events, like Plumbers or LSF/MM. Structurally either would be a fit > > for the past discussion topics and both could probably accommodate > > (although I don't think either could expand to a fourth day to do it). > > A final thing we might do is change the structure of the event itself > > to have more sponsorable outcomes; perhaps simply making the event more > > like the kernel summit of old, so moving back the KS track from > > Plumbers would be enough? > > I guess it really comes down to what Linus wants. He's been saying he would > love to get rid of Kernel/Maintainers Summit for years. Does Linus still > find it useful? It is still good to have the more controversial topics done > face to face and allow Linus to listen in. I've been saying he needs to > interact more with the general community given the number of times he told > me that "nobody does that" when I'm hearing from talking with people at > conferences that several people do do that. > > Thus, I still think it is good to find a way to make Linus do what he loves > and interact with his fellow developers ;-) But perhaps it's time to > rethink the format and restructure it once again. Please note though that Maintainer Summit now plays a more formal role in the project due to Documentation/process/conclave.rst, so if the format is changed substantially, it may also call for an update of that contingency plan.