Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Time to cal l it quits for the maintainer summit?

On 9 August 2026 21:26:53 GMT-04:00, Theodore Tso <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sun, Aug 09, 2026 at 05:56:45PM -0500, Liam R. Howlett wrote:
>> 
>> We could have a reserved number of seats dedicated for specific
>> subject that are temporary seats that would be used for a specific
>> topic.  As a specific topic expert or interested party, they would
>> be less likely to stay quiet or be disregarded as not knowing the
>> workings of a specific policy.
>
>One of the reasons why we discuss maintainers summit topics in advance
>is partially to create the agenda, but to also be aware who some of
>the interested parties will be.  And the program committee *does* take
>that into account.
>
>The other reason why the discussions on the ksummit list are so useful
>is that it *is* a pre-MS discussion.  Everyone gets to hear the voices
>who feel strongly about a particular topic --- for example, such as
>the AI/LLM discussion.  The voices and ideas that are presented in the
>mailing list is absolutely something that influences the discussion
>that happens in the room.

But not *who* is in the room for those topics?  I'm suggesting that you could select someone outside the core group to provide input for the topic.  It appears to everyone that the core group is constantly selected and I am trying to suggest ways to help expand the views.  I am beginning to think no new ideas are wanted, tbh.

>
>> This brings to mind something else which I've been think for some
>> time, we should have delegates when someone cannot make it in
>> person.  Not as a replacement, but as someone that can speak up when
>> things are relevant to their particular expertise - and potentially
>> to help the succession planning of that subsystem.
>
>As far as succession planning of a subsystem, I'd argue that MS isn't
>the best place.  For example, at this year's LSF/MM/BPF, the
>discussion over succession planning of the mm subsystem took place
>there.  

I have no idea how you read what I typed and came up with this response.

Let me try again.

The memory management (MM) subsystem will have a new lead maintainer within the near future that will be representing us at MS (if we have a seat at the table at all).  What happened differently last year and this year in the planning committee to account for this upcoming change and how it will impact MS?

Liam