On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 06:54:14AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote: > My impression as an SPI member is that in practice most SPI members come > from the SPI projects [1], and due to Debian's size Debian developers > are the majority of SPI members. That's true -- but bear in mind that most SPI members are inactive, and don't even vote for SPI leader. I doubt most existing members could be bothered to vote for Linux Foundation TAB. > If you elect at KS it'll favor kernel developers. > If you let all SPI members elect it'll favor Debian developers. The crucial difference is that anyone (within reason) can join SPI. It's hard to join KS. And it doesn't just 'favour' kernel developers, it completely limits it to kernel developers. > The Linux Foundation homepage says "The Technical Advisory Board (TAB) > provides the Linux kernel community a direct voice into The Linux > Foundation???s activities...". If this is the intention, an election at > the KS is the best solution. I think that's a statement of the current position, and not necessarily where the TAB wants to be. -- "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." - 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/
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: James Bottomley <[email protected]>
- Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Andy Isaacson <[email protected]>
- Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: "Josh Boyer" <[email protected]>
- Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Matt Mackall <[email protected]>
- Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Matthew Wilcox <[email protected]>
- Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- From: Adrian Bunk <[email protected]>
- Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- Prev by Date: Re: false positive in checkpatch.pl (complex macro values)
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] i386: Fix a couple busy loops in mach_wakecpu.h:wait_for_init_deassert()
- Previous by thread: Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- Next by thread: Re: [Tech-board-discuss] Re: [Ksummit-2007-discuss] Re: Linux Foundation Technical Advisory Board Elections
- Index(es):
 |