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.
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.