Hi,
Flock is next week and there is a session about kernel process (https://flock2017.sched.com/event/Bm9W/fedora-kernel-process-review). Obviously not everyone can attend flock but if there are topics you would like to see discussed, please let me know.
Thanks, Laura
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Laura Abbott labbott@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Flock is next week and there is a session about kernel process (https://flock2017.sched.com/event/Bm9W/fedora-kernel-process-review). Obviously not everyone can attend flock but if there are topics you would like to see discussed, please let me know.
Presumably you have i686 kernel maintenance from a x86-32 SIG on that?
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Laura Abbott labbott@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Flock is next week and there is a session about kernel process (https://flock2017.sched.com/event/Bm9W/fedora-kernel-process-review). Obviously not everyone can attend flock but if there are topics you would like to see discussed, please let me know.
Presumably you have i686 kernel maintenance from a x86-32 SIG on that?
Why would that be necessary? It's a talk about process. The process should be the same regardless of who is doing the work. I doubt we need to have specific topics per architecture. If we do, why wouldn't we do one for aarch64, s390x and ppc64le and ppc64?
This is my opinion alone, but if an x86-32 SIG wants to form and participate, they need to form and participate like everyone else.
josh
On 08/24/2017 10:18 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Laura Abbott labbott@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Flock is next week and there is a session about kernel process (https://flock2017.sched.com/event/Bm9W/fedora-kernel-process-review). Obviously not everyone can attend flock but if there are topics you would like to see discussed, please let me know.
Presumably you have i686 kernel maintenance from a x86-32 SIG on that?
Why would that be necessary? It's a talk about process. The process should be the same regardless of who is doing the work. I doubt we need to have specific topics per architecture. If we do, why wouldn't we do one for aarch64, s390x and ppc64le and ppc64?
This is my opinion alone, but if an x86-32 SIG wants to form and participate, they need to form and participate like everyone else.
josh
I did not have i686 on the agenda mostly because the state of it is still unclear. I do consider not-x86 arches worth of process discussion though mostly because it isn't handled by Justin and I. If there are specific aspects of the kernel process that could be improved for those people who work on subsets of the kernel (e.g. arches), I think that's a good topic for this forum.
So, if arm/aarch64/s390x/ppc64/ppc64le/i686 people have specific process topics, I can add that to the agenda. I don't want to have an open discussion on i686 though as I think that belongs elsewhere.
Thanks, Laura
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Josh Boyer jwboyer@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Laura Abbott labbott@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Flock is next week and there is a session about kernel process (https://flock2017.sched.com/event/Bm9W/fedora-kernel-process-review). Obviously not everyone can attend flock but if there are topics you would like to see discussed, please let me know.
Presumably you have i686 kernel maintenance from a x86-32 SIG on that?
Why would that be necessary? It's a talk about process. The process should be the same regardless of who is doing the work. I doubt we need to have specific topics per architecture. If we do, why wouldn't we do one for aarch64, s390x and ppc64le and ppc64?
Because they already have maintainers and there's not an outstanding proposal for them to be dropped altogether, I also note you leave ARMv7 out of that list.
This is my opinion alone, but if an x86-32 SIG wants to form and participate, they need to form and participate like everyone else.
Sure, but that's entirely my point, maybe there's some possible x86-32 SIG people that would like some help and assistance and Flock would certainly be the optimal time to get some real direction from the kernel maintainers to ensure that happens and hence the reason for my suggestion of it as a topic
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Josh Boyer jwboyer@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Peter Robinson pbrobinson@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Laura Abbott labbott@redhat.com wrote:
Hi,
Flock is next week and there is a session about kernel process (https://flock2017.sched.com/event/Bm9W/fedora-kernel-process-review). Obviously not everyone can attend flock but if there are topics you would like to see discussed, please let me know.
Presumably you have i686 kernel maintenance from a x86-32 SIG on that?
Why would that be necessary? It's a talk about process. The process should be the same regardless of who is doing the work. I doubt we need to have specific topics per architecture. If we do, why wouldn't we do one for aarch64, s390x and ppc64le and ppc64?
Because they already have maintainers and there's not an outstanding proposal for them to be dropped altogether, I also note you leave ARMv7 out of that list.
ARMv7 is a primary architecture already very well maintained, which is one of the reasons it became a primary architecture and one of the reasons it's not being discussed from being demoted. I didn't think preaching to people that already know the process was worthwhile. Then again, the rest of the architectures I mentioned haven't had any trouble either, which kind of further proves my point.
This is my opinion alone, but if an x86-32 SIG wants to form and participate, they need to form and participate like everyone else.
Sure, but that's entirely my point, maybe there's some possible x86-32 SIG people that would like some help and assistance and Flock would certainly be the optimal time to get some real direction from the kernel maintainers to ensure that happens and hence the reason for my suggestion of it as a topic
I still disagree. If the talk is on process, just attend the talk and listen to the process. Then ask questions if needed. I don't see a need to explicitly call out any architecture. Just show up.
josh
kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org