Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-apachecon-discuss-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-apachecon-discuss-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B716FC14C for ; Fri, 4 May 2012 15:56:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 23162 invoked by uid 500); 4 May 2012 15:56:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-apachecon-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 23102 invoked by uid 500); 4 May 2012 15:56:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact apachecon-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: apachecon-discuss@apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list apachecon-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 23092 invoked by uid 99); 4 May 2012 15:56:57 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 May 2012 15:56:57 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of grobmeier@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.178 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.178] (HELO mail-qc0-f178.google.com) (209.85.216.178) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 May 2012 15:56:51 +0000 Received: by qcse1 with SMTP id e1so2377804qcs.23 for ; Fri, 04 May 2012 08:56:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=QOVtZVUw8xfrByV9B6mA+FOSUJyVjvkL8x6OOukZ67M=; b=UdSh9LpDUJUJDzpwFSRE9DAt3IrwF2JjtccdvN1NolPb8J0D8N4EDyFTNcr0ea4uzT kzFLf9at4j/QKBm2NDO/bu3frslTUuC2qLJIPdME/P+QUOUOPgoWQPWlrFRIDHSdHQuW qUOPXTZZF1ZROLghqokY5Dsy1mv37quvPOVygnLWB9dyebudhYZueBT7/thpuXxaES1A fpo7aUR9TBhLBFzU3O79+IOG/JF34OhnGWOojEnjAd4nTZ9eGFlBkDMOqDdwK7WHXcwA FEJ9wbNggQgJrJMVQU8hxofEfmRqelBNmRvhGWp1j0NSYev1Zv7mKjy8Kqh3D1BFv3Zw GYGQ== Received: by 10.224.76.146 with SMTP id c18mr9831130qak.56.1336146991039; Fri, 04 May 2012 08:56:31 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.229.112.15 with HTTP; Fri, 4 May 2012 08:56:10 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1336107440.1203.YahooMailNeo@web171501.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <2CDD44F49E3D47459EB0282354AE42AE280CD2032C@DEWDFECCR05.wdf.sap.corp> From: Christian Grobmeier Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 17:56:10 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ApacheCon's EU 2012 and NA 2013 - save the dates and get involved! To: apachecon-discuss@apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Fri, May 4, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Nick Burch wrote: > On Fri, 4 May 2012, Rich Bowen wrote: >> >> On 2012 5 4 07:04, "Goetz, Paul" wrote: >>> >>> However: The only other option left would be CW43 = 20-22 November - and >>> this is clashing with US Thanksgiving. So moving the event to late November >>> would more or less exclude US committers... >> >> >> Although I have no wish to be excluded, EU events should not be planned >> for >> the convenience of US attendees. Thats only bitten us in the past. >> Ignoring >> JAX seems like a bad idea, and ultimately a bigger deal. > > > SAP are kindly sponsoring us the venue and for some food, which is amazing > and gives us a chance to try something different, but sadly does mean we > don't have quite the same range of possible dates as when we're paying a few > hundred thousand to a hotel... > > I'm not an American, and I don't live there, so the thanksgiving thing > doesn't affect me personally. However, my hope is that we can try out some > new ideas and formats in Europe, and the North America conference can learn > from that. (The event in Europe will be smaller and cheaper, so we should > have more chance to experiment and innovate) If we clash with thanksgiving > then we'll loose the bulk of our American attendees, which likely means we > loose both those with experiences of organising past ApacheCons, and we > loose much of the chance for the organisers of the next one to learn from > us. > > I completely agree that clashing with JAX isn't great, and will cause us to > miss out on some German speaking attendees, which is a huge shame. (Am I > right in thinking that it's all in German, so we won't loose any other > European language groups?) many valid points, esp the point with the experienced organizers we would miss. Questions: - how many attendees from the US are expected (probably we know that from the past EU cons)? - how many speakers from the US are expected? - how many speakers from the EU are expected? - how many attendees from the EU are expected? - how many attendees in general are expected / can participate? Lets say the ApacheCon has room for <500 people and there are many speakers from the US then I think the problem with WJAX is smaller. Some people might want to see people they cannot see so often (WJAX has some superheros, but also many german speakers usually). In addition, not everybody in germany is excited about WJAX. Yes, JavaMagazin is popular. But I tend to think the community aspect of apache is not to underestimate. WJAX/JAX very often has speakers on architecture and other buzzwords. ApacheCon might have more technology related talks (I hope so). Probably we can address other people than WJAX then it would not be so worse. Is there a chance to get some estimations on the numbers below? Another question: talks are in english right? Most talks at WJAX are in german, at least to my knowledge. ACEU would then cause people from outside germany to come and this would also reduce the problems. Last year i was a WJAX speaker and I rarely have heard attendees speaking in english. BTW its great SAP supports the event. I will meet many friends up there, I hope. > It's very hard to judge the two, but my feeling > was that loosing all the Americans (especially the ACNA13 team) would be > worse. I could be wrong though (it does happen!), so if you think we've > weighed the two up wrong please explain why! > > Nick -- http://www.grobmeier.de https://www.timeandbill.de