community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ross.Gard...@microsoft.com>
Subject RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Date Thu, 19 Feb 2015 16:05:50 GMT
I just added 4 sessions. There is one more for the community track if Joe wants it (not in
CFP). So there is space for a 6 session track from Hadrian.

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: jan i<mailto:jani@apache.org>
Sent: ‎2/‎19/‎2015 7:59 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org>
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule

On 19 February 2015 at 16:49, Hadrian Zbarcea <hzbarcea@gmail.com> wrote:

> Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
> run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
>
I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put together a 6
> talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get on it
> and have it done probably before the end of the day.
>

Rich is boarding his plane now, but I am fine with such a track...but
please coordinate the number of free spaces with Ross, so we avoid double
bookings.

rgds
jan i


>
> Cheers
> Hadrian
>
>
>
>
> On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
>
>> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com> 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.
>>
>> rgds
>> jan i
>>
>>
>>  --
>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>
>>>
>

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