On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:05 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 6:18 PM, Josh Boyer
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 1:03 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Laura Abbott <labbott(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>> Flock is next week and there is a session about kernel process
>>> 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.