community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <>
Subject RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Date Thu, 19 Feb 2015 15:39:43 GMT
Re pushing out to PMCs. Historically this has not been a good idea. Once you have 200+ PMCs
and PPMCs fighting over 200+ slots you get a horribly disjointed program with no real value.

This is one reason why I want LF to set the theme. We can then create a smaller list of PMCs
that fit the theme. 

My as yet unspoken hope is that we will then end up with multiple ApacheCons each year, something
like "ApacheCon: Big Data", "ApacheCon: Applications", "ApacheCon: Cloud". However we need
to give LF time to walk before we ask them to consider running (I believe that time has now
passed and will make this suggestion in Austin when we debrief.


-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [] 
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 7:29 AM
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule

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
View raw message