community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From jan i <>
Subject Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Date Thu, 19 Feb 2015 15:29:09 GMT
On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <> wrote:

> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience,
> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early caused
> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew
> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and we
> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
> For those involved in the process so far:
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got 7
> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for one,
> think we have a kickin' schedule.
> Problems that I think still need solving:
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.

> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these will
> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few half-day
> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on Wednesday,
> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
> talks).
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some
> empties.
I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course)
and the speaker must have an accepted talk.

> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very
> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting
> talk abstracts.
This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have
track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
create the right talks.

I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.

> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can
> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner of
> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
thats me :-)

I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as
much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.

jan i

> --
> Rich Bowen - - @rbowen
> - @apachecon

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message