Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 07:05:21 -0400ve a bit more direct ability to make > An SPI-like or Debian-like approach with pure democracy might look > good on paper, but when you have companies donating hundreds of > thousands of dollars and up to the organization, having a board which > is elected by mobs of GPLv3 groupies would understandably scare them. > So we need some way of selecting the kernel developers who are willing > to invest the time to help the LF do the right thing with the > resources that they have been given. one thing here before people bring up the "what about the users" argument; the Linux Foundation already has a separate forum for getting input from users as well as a separate forum for "vendors"; the TAB is aimed at the developer (community) side in this 3-fora structure. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 10:49:57PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > Then you're misconstruing the interactions. A representational role > would imply the ability to speak for the community and make promises on > its behalf. That, as Ted has already said, can't happen. Instead, the > value to the LF is that the TAB contains people experienced in community > interactions who can act as a sounding board for what may (or may not) > be well received. One thing that may be helpful for people to understand is that serving on the TAB is more a matter of service than anything else. There are relatively few benefits of actually being on the TAB. Sure, you may be more likely to get a free trip to Japan to talk about what's going on in kernel development and to help some of the Japanese developers being employed by the Japanese member comapnies become more effective contributors to Linux and the LKML. But, the sort of people that serve on the TAB generally travel too much already, and there has already been talk about trying to get more people outside of the TAB who are interested in serving in this role to have a chance to go to the LF Japan Linux Symposium. And sure, the TAB members have a bit more direct ability to make suggestions about how various LF programs that directly benefit the Linux community will be managed --- but the flip side of that is there are monthly concalls and documents to review, and for the chair of the TAB (currently James), the responsibility to sit on day-long, face-to-face OSDL (and now Linux Foundation) board meetings. This last is important, since many of the other members of the board are from companies that are contributing large sums of money to the LF, which means they are generally VP's and General Managers. Those folks are generally not technical at all, and are so far removed from the kernel community that they have no idea how to help the kernel community or even if certain proposals or initiative that they might try out would be well received. OSDL, to its credit (and those of you who know me know that I was often very critical of the OSDL, in part because its leadership and management was so badly disconnected from community concerns), FINALLY realized this was a problem in recent years, and so the TAB was the first attempt to try to solve this problem. An SPI-like or Debian-like approach with pure democracy might look good on paper, but when you have companies donating hundreds of thousands of dollars and up to the organization, having a board which is elected by mobs of GPLv3 groupies would understandably scare them. So we need some way of selecting the kernel developers who are willing to invest the time to help the LF do the right thing with the resources that they have been given. One way of doing this would be to have someone from the LF just pick the obvious candidates; the problem with that is that it would be rightly viewed as cronyism. Another way would be to have a membership committee that selected people who are considered true members of the kernel development community, and then let them vote. But that's a rather heavyweight solution, and if could result in all sorts of hard feelings about who is and isn't allowed to vote. Having the election at the KS was basically a lightweight way of doing this, although I would have to admit that the pool of electors is a much smaller than my liking. If the TAB was able to make promises on behalf of the community, or enter into deals that bound the community[1], or if it controlled a significant monetary budget, then we would probably need a much more heavyweight and rigorous election process. But, as other people have said, patches are welcome. Feel free to suggest other ways in which this could be done, keeping in mind our design constraints. - Ted [1] Which at one point the FSF was hoping they could do during the GPLv3 discussions. We very quickly set them straight that while the TAB could talk about concerns that we as individuals had and talk about concerns that had been expressed on the LKML, there was no way that the TAB could negotiate any kind of quid pro quo on behalf of the community; and thus we could not represent the kernel community in that sense of the word. The only way in which the TAB is "representational" is in the sense of the word "representative sample"; the LF leadership team can't talk to every single kernel developer, so it needs to find a what is hopefully a representative sample of kernel developers, who are also willing to put in the time and effort to help the LF succeed. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 10:49:57PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: Then you're misconstruing the interactions. A representational role would imply the ability to speak for the community and make promises on its behalf. That, as Ted has already said, can't happen. Instead, the value to the LF is that the TAB contains people experienced in community interactions who can act as a sounding board for what may (or may not) be well received. One thing that may be helpful for people to understand is that serving on the TAB is more a matter of service than anything else. There are relatively few benefits of actually being on the TAB. Sure, you may be more likely to get a free trip to Japan to talk about what's going on in kernel development and to help some of the Japanese developers being employed by the Japanese member comapnies become more effective contributors to Linux and the LKML. But, the sort of people that serve on the TAB generally travel too much already, and there has already been talk about trying to get more people outside of the TAB who are interested in serving in this role to have a chance to go to the LF Japan Linux Symposium. And sure, the TAB members have a bit more direct ability to make suggestions about how various LF programs that directly benefit the Linux community will be managed --- but the flip side of that is there are monthly concalls and documents to review, and for the chair of the TAB (currently James), the responsibility to sit on day-long, face-to-face OSDL (and now Linux Foundation) board meetings. This last is important, since many of the other members of the board are from companies that are contributing large sums of money to the LF, which means they are generally VP's and General Managers. Those folks are generally not technical at all, and are so far removed from the kernel community that they have no idea how to help the kernel community or even if certain proposals or initiative that they might try out would be well received. OSDL, to its credit (and those of you who know me know that I was often very critical of the OSDL, in part because its leadership and management was so badly disconnected from community concerns), FINALLY realized this was a problem in recent years, and so the TAB was the first attempt to try to solve this problem. An SPI-like or Debian-like approach with pure democracy might look good on paper, but when you have companies donating hundreds of thousands of dollars and up to the organization, having a board which is elected by mobs of GPLv3 groupies would understandably scare them. So we need some way of selecting the kernel developers who are willing to invest the time to help the LF do the right thing with the resources that they have been given. One way of doing this would be to have someone from the LF just pick the obvious candidates; the problem with that is that it would be rightly viewed as cronyism. Another way would be to have a membership committee that selected people who are considered true members of the kernel development community, and then let them vote. But that's a rather heavyweight solution, and if could result in all sorts of hard feelings about who is and isn't allowed to vote. Having the election at the KS was basically a lightweight way of doing this, although I would have to admit that the pool of electors is a much smaller than my liking. If the TAB was able to make promises on behalf of the community, or enter into deals that bound the community[1], or if it controlled a significant monetary budget, then we would probably need a much more heavyweight and rigorous election process. But, as other people have said, patches are welcome. Feel free to suggest other ways in which this could be done, keeping in mind our design constraints. - Ted [1] Which at one point the FSF was hoping they could do during the GPLv3 discussions. We very quickly set them straight that while the TAB could talk about concerns that we as individuals had and talk about concerns that had been expressed on the LKML, there was no way that the TAB could negotiate any kind of quid pro quo on behalf of the community; and thus we could not represent the kernel community in that sense of the word. The only way in which the TAB is representational is in the sense of the word representative sample; the LF leadership team can't talk to every single kernel developer, so it needs to find a what is hopefully a representative sample of kernel developers, who are also willing to put in the time and effort to help the LF succeed. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 07:05:21 -0400ve a bit more direct ability to make An SPI-like or Debian-like approach with pure democracy might look good on paper, but when you have companies donating hundreds of thousands of dollars and up to the organization, having a board which is elected by mobs of GPLv3 groupies would understandably scare them. So we need some way of selecting the kernel developers who are willing to invest the time to help the LF do the right thing with the resources that they have been given. one thing here before people bring up the what about the users argument; the Linux Foundation already has a separate forum for getting input from users as well as a separate forum for vendors; the TAB is aimed at the developer (community) side in this 3-fora structure. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 19:45 -0700, James Morris wrote: > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Theodore Tso wrote: > > > community. This was especially true the first year before the TAB was > > elected; but even after we held an election at last year's KS, I think > > it's fair to say that while we try to advise the OSDL and now the LF > > with what the community would like, the only person that we can really > > represent is ourselves. > > Perhaps I'm missing something, but this seems a little odd. > > If I understand correctly: with the stated goal of addressing cronyism, a > mechanism is implemented where only people who are selected by a committee > or who pay are able to vote, in an election for candidates who only > represent themselves, and where the vast majority of the community is > excluded from voting. I don't think we claimed we have the perfect system. However, the failure of anyone on this list to come up with a better one seems to speak volumes about the difficulty of the problem. If you have a proposal, please make it ... otherwise simply griping about the current system isn't going to change anything. > The TAB is described on the LF site as: > > "The Technical Advisory Board (TAB) provides the Linux kernel community a > direct voice into The Linux Foundation's activities..." > > which certainly suggests to me a representative role on behalf of the > community. Then you're misconstruing the interactions. A representational role would imply the ability to speak for the community and make promises on its behalf. That, as Ted has already said, can't happen. Instead, the value to the LF is that the TAB contains people experienced in community interactions who can act as a sounding board for what may (or may not) be well received. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Theodore Tso wrote: > community. This was especially true the first year before the TAB was > elected; but even after we held an election at last year's KS, I think > it's fair to say that while we try to advise the OSDL and now the LF > with what the community would like, the only person that we can really > represent is ourselves. Perhaps I'm missing something, but this seems a little odd. If I understand correctly: with the stated goal of addressing cronyism, a mechanism is implemented where only people who are selected by a committee or who pay are able to vote, in an election for candidates who only represent themselves, and where the vast majority of the community is excluded from voting. The TAB is described on the LF site as: "The Technical Advisory Board (TAB) provides the Linux kernel community a direct voice into The Linux Foundation's activities..." which certainly suggests to me a representative role on behalf of the community. - James -- James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 05:14:26PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > It's really just a represent the community type of role. The LF uses > the TAB to get a sense of the community for various things they and > their members are thinking. Conversely, the TAB was initially formed to > get a set of specific objectives out of the then OSDL (Doc Fellowship, > Travel Fund, NDA programme and HW lending library plus a few other > things). The TAB takes proposals from the community for things it needs > that require an organisation to sort out (a good example of this is the > currently being acted on PCI sig membership, which will give us access > to the PCI specs plus a vendor ID that the virtualisation people asked > for to help with virtual device recognition). James description is a fair description, but I think the one thing that I'd want to clarify is that the members of the TAB have been very careful about in the past two years is that we don't speak for the community. This was especially true the first year before the TAB was elected; but even after we held an election at last year's KS, I think it's fair to say that while we try to advise the OSDL and now the LF with what the community would like, the only person that we can really represent is ourselves. On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:44:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett whote: >The reasons for this may be obvious with more understanding of how the >TAB came into existence, but given that the Linux Foundation isn't >limited to kernel development (see the desktop architects stuff, for >instance) it seems a bit odd for it to have a technical board that's >determined at a kernel-only event. Yes, the LF is about more than just the kernel, and Jim Zemlin does get input from people beyond the kernel developers on the TAB. So right now the TAB really is the "Kernel TAB". The history behind that is that original a group of kernel developers decided to that the OSDL wasn't doing anything useful for the issues they wanted to deal with, and so there was a proposal to start a new organization, called the Kernel Foundation, that would do those things. But before we did this, a few of us recommend that we one last attempt to work with the OSDL. As it turns out, the OSDL management was under a directive to try to be more relevant, and so there was an agreement to work with the people who were planning on creating the Kernel Foundation, and this became the TAB. Hope this helps, - Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 16:47 -0700, James Morris wrote: > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, James Bottomley wrote: > > > The procedure is to read statements before the election in a BOF at the > > Kernel Summit, so the order is statements first then voting. > > Just to clarify, are sponsor delegates and KS committee members entitled > to vote? Anybody who turns up is eligible to vote. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, James Bottomley wrote: > The procedure is to read statements before the election in a BOF at the > Kernel Summit, so the order is statements first then voting. Just to clarify, are sponsor delegates and KS committee members entitled to vote? - James -- James Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 17:58 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 04:43:58PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > > > The elections for five of the ten members of the Linux Foundation > > > > Technical Advisory Board[TAB] are held every year, currently the > > > > election will be at the 2007 Kernel Summit in a BOF session. > > > > > > > > Anyone is eligible to stand for election, simply send your nomination > > > > to: > > > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > Only people invited to the kernel summit will be there in person (and > > > > therefore able to vote), but if you cannot attend, your nomination > email > > > > will be read out before the voting begins. > > > > > > > > We currently have Three nominees: > > > > > > > > Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Greg Kroah Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the BOF where the > > > > election is held (on the evening of either the 5th or 6th of > September. > > > > Although, please remember if you're not going to be present that > things > > > > go wrong with both networks and mailing lists, so get your nomination > in > > > > early). > > > > > > I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. > > > Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort > > > of "why you should vote for me" type statement. Does such a thing > > > exist for this process ? > > > > > > Not that I've anything against any of the above candidates, but this > > > should probably be more than just a popularity contest. > > > > Yes ... well, there was a need to get away from the cronyism of OSDL in > > the past. The problem was to come up with a mechanism that did away > > with this. The elected one was about the best we could find, but if > > you've an alternative suggestion, by all means let's hear it. > > Possibly I'm confused about the actual role that these nominees are > running for. If it's a rigid position in which they don't get to > do anything outside of a specific mandate, then any of the above > would be qualified to represent the kernel community. It's really just a represent the community type of role. The LF uses the TAB to get a sense of the community for various things they and their members are thinking. Conversely, the TAB was initially formed to get a set of specific objectives out of the then OSDL (Doc Fellowship, Travel Fund, NDA programme and HW lending library plus a few other things). The TAB takes proposals from the community for things it needs that require an organisation to sort out (a good example of this is the currently being acted on PCI sig membership, which will give us access to the PCI specs plus a vendor ID that the virtualisation people asked for to help with virtual device recognition). > However, if there's flexability for a candidate to bring something > new to the position, an online statement from each nominee _Before_ > the voting begins declaring what they intend to do should they get elected. > Reading out the statement before the summit and also asking people > to vote before that happens seems a little disingenuous. The procedure is to read statements before the election in a BOF at the Kernel Summit, so the order is statements first then voting. > Can you explain more about what the succesful candidate would actually > do for me, and why I (and others) would want to vote one way or the other? The base requirement is just someone you trust to look after the interests of the community and correctly reflect them back to the LF. I think someone who had concrete proposals to make the LF better or to come up with new ways it could help the community would be on to a winner ... but then I'm a bit naïve when it comes to trusting democracy. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 04:43:58PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > > The elections for five of the ten members of the Linux Foundation > > > Technical Advisory Board[TAB] are held every year, currently the > > > election will be at the 2007 Kernel Summit in a BOF session. > > > > > > Anyone is eligible to stand for election, simply send your nomination > > > to: > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > Only people invited to the kernel summit will be there in person (and > > > therefore able to vote), but if you cannot attend, your nomination email > > > will be read out before the voting begins. > > > > > > We currently have Three nominees: > > > > > > Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Greg Kroah Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the BOF where the > > > election is held (on the evening of either the 5th or 6th of September. > > > Although, please remember if you're not going to be present that things > > > go wrong with both networks and mailing lists, so get your nomination in > > > early). > > > > I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. > > Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort > > of "why you should vote for me" type statement. Does such a thing > > exist for this process ? > > > > Not that I've anything against any of the above candidates, but this > > should probably be more than just a popularity contest. > > Yes ... well, there was a need to get away from the cronyism of OSDL in > the past. The problem was to come up with a mechanism that did away > with this. The elected one was about the best we could find, but if > you've an alternative suggestion, by all means let's hear it. Possibly I'm confused about the actual role that these nominees are running for. If it's a rigid position in which they don't get to do anything outside of a specific mandate, then any of the above would be qualified to represent the kernel community. However, if there's flexability for a candidate to bring something new to the position, an online statement from each nominee _Before_ the voting begins declaring what they intend to do should they get elected. Reading out the statement before the summit and also asking people to vote before that happens seems a little disingenuous. Can you explain more about what the succesful candidate would actually do for me, and why I (and others) would want to vote one way or the other? Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 14:38 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:33:58 -0700 Chris Wright wrote: > > > * Dave Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > > I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. > > > Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort > > > of "why you should vote for me" type statement. Does such a thing > > > exist for this process ? > > > > Last year each nominee made a statement as you describe before > > the votes were cast (during the voting session). > > and if they won't be present? The Chair reads their statement. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 17:22 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 10:22:59AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: > > The elections for five of the ten members of the Linux Foundation > > Technical Advisory Board[TAB] are held every year, currently the > > election will be at the 2007 Kernel Summit in a BOF session. > > > > Anyone is eligible to stand for election, simply send your nomination > > to: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Only people invited to the kernel summit will be there in person (and > > therefore able to vote), but if you cannot attend, your nomination email > > will be read out before the voting begins. > > > > We currently have Three nominees: > > > > Arjan van de Ven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Greg Kroah Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Christoph Lameter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the BOF where the > > election is held (on the evening of either the 5th or 6th of September. > > Although, please remember if you're not going to be present that things > > go wrong with both networks and mailing lists, so get your nomination in > > early). > > I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. > Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort > of "why you should vote for me" type statement. Does such a thing > exist for this process ? > > Not that I've anything against any of the above candidates, but this > should probably be more than just a popularity contest. Yes ... well, there was a need to get away from the cronyism of OSDL in the past. The problem was to come up with a mechanism that did away with this. The elected one was about the best we could find, but if you've an alternative suggestion, by all means let's hear it. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:33:58 -0700 Chris Wright wrote: > * Dave Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > > I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. > > Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort > > of "why you should vote for me" type statement. Does such a thing > > exist for this process ? > > Last year each nominee made a statement as you describe before > the votes were cast (during the voting session). and if they won't be present? --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
* Dave Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. > Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort > of "why you should vote for me" type statement. Does such a thing > exist for this process ? Last year each nominee made a statement as you describe before the votes were cast (during the voting session). thanks, -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
* Dave Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort of why you should vote for me type statement. Does such a thing exist for this process ? Last year each nominee made a statement as you describe before the votes were cast (during the voting session). thanks, -chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:33:58 -0700 Chris Wright wrote: * Dave Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort of why you should vote for me type statement. Does such a thing exist for this process ? Last year each nominee made a statement as you describe before the votes were cast (during the voting session). and if they won't be present? --- ~Randy *** Remember to use Documentation/SubmitChecklist when testing your code *** - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 17:22 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: removed [EMAIL PROTECTED] as its subscriber only On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 10:22:59AM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: The elections for five of the ten members of the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board[TAB] are held every year, currently the election will be at the 2007 Kernel Summit in a BOF session. Anyone is eligible to stand for election, simply send your nomination to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only people invited to the kernel summit will be there in person (and therefore able to vote), but if you cannot attend, your nomination email will be read out before the voting begins. We currently have Three nominees: Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Kroah Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED] The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the BOF where the election is held (on the evening of either the 5th or 6th of September. Although, please remember if you're not going to be present that things go wrong with both networks and mailing lists, so get your nomination in early). I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort of why you should vote for me type statement. Does such a thing exist for this process ? Not that I've anything against any of the above candidates, but this should probably be more than just a popularity contest. Yes ... well, there was a need to get away from the cronyism of OSDL in the past. The problem was to come up with a mechanism that did away with this. The elected one was about the best we could find, but if you've an alternative suggestion, by all means let's hear it. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 14:38 -0700, Randy Dunlap wrote: On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:33:58 -0700 Chris Wright wrote: * Dave Jones ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort of why you should vote for me type statement. Does such a thing exist for this process ? Last year each nominee made a statement as you describe before the votes were cast (during the voting session). and if they won't be present? The Chair reads their statement. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 04:43:58PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: The elections for five of the ten members of the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board[TAB] are held every year, currently the election will be at the 2007 Kernel Summit in a BOF session. Anyone is eligible to stand for election, simply send your nomination to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only people invited to the kernel summit will be there in person (and therefore able to vote), but if you cannot attend, your nomination email will be read out before the voting begins. We currently have Three nominees: Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Kroah Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED] The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the BOF where the election is held (on the evening of either the 5th or 6th of September. Although, please remember if you're not going to be present that things go wrong with both networks and mailing lists, so get your nomination in early). I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort of why you should vote for me type statement. Does such a thing exist for this process ? Not that I've anything against any of the above candidates, but this should probably be more than just a popularity contest. Yes ... well, there was a need to get away from the cronyism of OSDL in the past. The problem was to come up with a mechanism that did away with this. The elected one was about the best we could find, but if you've an alternative suggestion, by all means let's hear it. Possibly I'm confused about the actual role that these nominees are running for. If it's a rigid position in which they don't get to do anything outside of a specific mandate, then any of the above would be qualified to represent the kernel community. However, if there's flexability for a candidate to bring something new to the position, an online statement from each nominee _Before_ the voting begins declaring what they intend to do should they get elected. Reading out the statement before the summit and also asking people to vote before that happens seems a little disingenuous. Can you explain more about what the succesful candidate would actually do for me, and why I (and others) would want to vote one way or the other? Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 17:58 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 04:43:58PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: The elections for five of the ten members of the Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board[TAB] are held every year, currently the election will be at the 2007 Kernel Summit in a BOF session. Anyone is eligible to stand for election, simply send your nomination to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only people invited to the kernel summit will be there in person (and therefore able to vote), but if you cannot attend, your nomination email will be read out before the voting begins. We currently have Three nominees: Arjan van de Ven [EMAIL PROTECTED] Greg Kroah Hartman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Christoph Lameter [EMAIL PROTECTED] The deadline for receiving nominations is up until the BOF where the election is held (on the evening of either the 5th or 6th of September. Although, please remember if you're not going to be present that things go wrong with both networks and mailing lists, so get your nomination in early). I have a reservation about voting for any of the above. Normally during any process involving votes, there exists some sort of why you should vote for me type statement. Does such a thing exist for this process ? Not that I've anything against any of the above candidates, but this should probably be more than just a popularity contest. Yes ... well, there was a need to get away from the cronyism of OSDL in the past. The problem was to come up with a mechanism that did away with this. The elected one was about the best we could find, but if you've an alternative suggestion, by all means let's hear it. Possibly I'm confused about the actual role that these nominees are running for. If it's a rigid position in which they don't get to do anything outside of a specific mandate, then any of the above would be qualified to represent the kernel community. It's really just a represent the community type of role. The LF uses the TAB to get a sense of the community for various things they and their members are thinking. Conversely, the TAB was initially formed to get a set of specific objectives out of the then OSDL (Doc Fellowship, Travel Fund, NDA programme and HW lending library plus a few other things). The TAB takes proposals from the community for things it needs that require an organisation to sort out (a good example of this is the currently being acted on PCI sig membership, which will give us access to the PCI specs plus a vendor ID that the virtualisation people asked for to help with virtual device recognition). However, if there's flexability for a candidate to bring something new to the position, an online statement from each nominee _Before_ the voting begins declaring what they intend to do should they get elected. Reading out the statement before the summit and also asking people to vote before that happens seems a little disingenuous. The procedure is to read statements before the election in a BOF at the Kernel Summit, so the order is statements first then voting. Can you explain more about what the succesful candidate would actually do for me, and why I (and others) would want to vote one way or the other? The base requirement is just someone you trust to look after the interests of the community and correctly reflect them back to the LF. I think someone who had concrete proposals to make the LF better or to come up with new ways it could help the community would be on to a winner ... but then I'm a bit naïve when it comes to trusting democracy. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, James Bottomley wrote: The procedure is to read statements before the election in a BOF at the Kernel Summit, so the order is statements first then voting. Just to clarify, are sponsor delegates and KS committee members entitled to vote? - James -- James Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 16:47 -0700, James Morris wrote: On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, James Bottomley wrote: The procedure is to read statements before the election in a BOF at the Kernel Summit, so the order is statements first then voting. Just to clarify, are sponsor delegates and KS committee members entitled to vote? Anybody who turns up is eligible to vote. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 05:14:26PM -0500, James Bottomley wrote: It's really just a represent the community type of role. The LF uses the TAB to get a sense of the community for various things they and their members are thinking. Conversely, the TAB was initially formed to get a set of specific objectives out of the then OSDL (Doc Fellowship, Travel Fund, NDA programme and HW lending library plus a few other things). The TAB takes proposals from the community for things it needs that require an organisation to sort out (a good example of this is the currently being acted on PCI sig membership, which will give us access to the PCI specs plus a vendor ID that the virtualisation people asked for to help with virtual device recognition). James description is a fair description, but I think the one thing that I'd want to clarify is that the members of the TAB have been very careful about in the past two years is that we don't speak for the community. This was especially true the first year before the TAB was elected; but even after we held an election at last year's KS, I think it's fair to say that while we try to advise the OSDL and now the LF with what the community would like, the only person that we can really represent is ourselves. On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 23:44:00 +0100, Matthew Garrett whote: The reasons for this may be obvious with more understanding of how the TAB came into existence, but given that the Linux Foundation isn't limited to kernel development (see the desktop architects stuff, for instance) it seems a bit odd for it to have a technical board that's determined at a kernel-only event. Yes, the LF is about more than just the kernel, and Jim Zemlin does get input from people beyond the kernel developers on the TAB. So right now the TAB really is the Kernel TAB. The history behind that is that original a group of kernel developers decided to that the OSDL wasn't doing anything useful for the issues they wanted to deal with, and so there was a proposal to start a new organization, called the Kernel Foundation, that would do those things. But before we did this, a few of us recommend that we one last attempt to work with the OSDL. As it turns out, the OSDL management was under a directive to try to be more relevant, and so there was an agreement to work with the people who were planning on creating the Kernel Foundation, and this became the TAB. Hope this helps, - Ted - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Theodore Tso wrote: community. This was especially true the first year before the TAB was elected; but even after we held an election at last year's KS, I think it's fair to say that while we try to advise the OSDL and now the LF with what the community would like, the only person that we can really represent is ourselves. Perhaps I'm missing something, but this seems a little odd. If I understand correctly: with the stated goal of addressing cronyism, a mechanism is implemented where only people who are selected by a committee or who pay are able to vote, in an election for candidates who only represent themselves, and where the vast majority of the community is excluded from voting. The TAB is described on the LF site as: The Technical Advisory Board (TAB) provides the Linux kernel community a direct voice into The Linux Foundation's activities... which certainly suggests to me a representative role on behalf of the community. - James -- James Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
On Wed, 2007-08-22 at 19:45 -0700, James Morris wrote: On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Theodore Tso wrote: community. This was especially true the first year before the TAB was elected; but even after we held an election at last year's KS, I think it's fair to say that while we try to advise the OSDL and now the LF with what the community would like, the only person that we can really represent is ourselves. Perhaps I'm missing something, but this seems a little odd. If I understand correctly: with the stated goal of addressing cronyism, a mechanism is implemented where only people who are selected by a committee or who pay are able to vote, in an election for candidates who only represent themselves, and where the vast majority of the community is excluded from voting. I don't think we claimed we have the perfect system. However, the failure of anyone on this list to come up with a better one seems to speak volumes about the difficulty of the problem. If you have a proposal, please make it ... otherwise simply griping about the current system isn't going to change anything. The TAB is described on the LF site as: The Technical Advisory Board (TAB) provides the Linux kernel community a direct voice into The Linux Foundation's activities... which certainly suggests to me a representative role on behalf of the community. Then you're misconstruing the interactions. A representational role would imply the ability to speak for the community and make promises on its behalf. That, as Ted has already said, can't happen. Instead, the value to the LF is that the TAB contains people experienced in community interactions who can act as a sounding board for what may (or may not) be well received. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
