<Martin.Oberhuber@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Sent by: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
08/11/2006 02:13 AM
Please respond to
DSDP PMC list <dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
"DSDP PMC list" <dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
RE: [dsdp-pmc] Tutorials at Eclipse
I do not like the idea of a "just
I think that from whatever people
go to on the "tutorial day", they should have something to take home with them.
In other words, even if it's a short (2 hour) tutorial, people should
be able to pick up an example
project as well as setup instructions, that allows them to
experiment with the stuff on their
own (in their freetime at EclipseCon, or later at home).
IMHO it's not so important
to do the actual hands-on exercises right in class, but to get help getting started with setup
and an initial project.
I agree that this hasn't been
very effective last year, mostly because speakers typically
distributed their examples in
last minute. Having an USB stick handed out in class
worked OK, but it typically took
half an hour or so until everybody had the examples
on their laptops, and even longer
until things were really set up. So I think the key part in making tutorials more productive,
will be to ask speakers prepare their material well in advance and encourage
participants to download examples BEFORE they
enter the tutorial.
When this is done, I think that
* A 2-hour tutorial (aka
VLT) would be sufficient to get participants set up with their
and walk through the examples together. In other words, people
would not write
code on their own, but watch the presenters write or explain the
examples. They would
typically not have time to do their own local experiments.
In practice, last
year several 4-hour tutorials were set up like this [but too long
for such a sort
of "interactive presentation".
A 2-hour tutorial
should have one 15-minute break in the middle, in which people
can either get some
refreshment or ask presenters for help setting up their
ultimate goal of a 2-hour tutorial would be that people get some feeling
for the technology, and (if they want) get a workspace set up themselves.
* A 4-hour tutorial should
follow the same basic outline as a 2-hour tutorial but have
3 15-minute breaks
for setup help, asking questions or getting refreshment. It would
allow to cover more
technical aspects and details, optionally allow participants to
do a little bit
of coding their own (this worked truly well in the EMF workshop last
The goal of a
4-hour tutorial would be that people get a workspace set up, and understand
the core APIs of some technology.
* In a full day workshop,
I think the goal should be that participants not only get
set up, but get
some help specific to their particular needs. In other words, they
should be able to
do some coding their own; they should be able to ask questions
needs in their current project. They should be able to experiment
with examples and
try their own side-tracks (assisted by the presenters). I guess
that whoever goes
to a Hands-on Workshop should acutally use what they have
learned in their
daily work later on.
Note that according
to this description, a Hands-on Workshop would actually make
sense for plain
beginners or users too (not only add-in providers), explaining JDT or
PDE features from
a user's perspective ... perhaps a hands-on workshop / beginners
class for plugin
writers would really be well received.
The goal of a
HOW would be that people get everything they need to use the technology themselves
in their own projects.
The main background of these thoughts
is that the core value of a tutorial is to get
started with something. After
this initial hurdle is taken, it's always much easier to
explore the help system etc.
The difference between a tutorial
and a long talk would still be that the tutorial digs
into the technology and allows
people to actually use it, while the talk would be
more of a presentation. Therefore,
I'd still call the 2-hour thing tutorial rather than
[mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gaff, Doug
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 10:34 PM
To: DSDP PMC list
Subject: [dsdp-pmc] Tutorials at Eclipse Con
Here’s the email thread
that I talked about on today’s PMC call.
In summary, tutorials
Very Long Talks (2 Hours;
3 per day)
Hands On Workshops (all
day; 1 per day)
So DSDP can have 3 VLT’s
or 1 HOW.
From our discussion today,
I think we agreed that VLT’s would suit the projects better.
[mailto:eclipse.org-pmc-leads-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gaff,
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 4:12 PM
To: Richard Gronback; Bjorn Freeman-Benson
Cc: John Graham; Scott Rosenbaum; eclipse.org-pmc-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [eclipse.org-pmc-leads] RE: Suggestion for tutorials
The conversion is as follows:
2 tutorials = 3 VLT’s or 1 HOW
I think each track lead
should survey the projects that fall into their track to figure out what
would suit them better.
From: Richard Gronback [mailto:richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 1:22 PM
To: Bjorn Freeman-Benson
Cc: Gaff, Doug; eclipse.org-pmc-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx; Ed Merks; Scott
Rosenbaum; Tim Wagner; John Graham
Subject: Re: Suggestion for tutorials
I like the explicit distinction between
hands-on and “just talking” with this approach, which is as important
to the presenters as it is the attendees when selecting.
I also think it fits well with the concept of multi-project/track mash-ups,
as they would require longer talks and/or day-long tutorials to do well.
If we’re going to do this, we’ll need to adjust our current allocations
to make room. Volunteers?
Who else is in favor of this approach, and which tracks would like to divide
their tutorial allocation along these lines? Attached is an updated
The hands-on tutorials have not been a big success at EclipseCon in the
past few years for a few reasons: (1) some people don't have laptops (I
can't imagine why you would go to a hands-on tutorial without a laptop,
but there it is); (2) the exercises tend to be too hard to do in a short
time (basically, it's very hard to design small informative coding lessons
against the huge Eclipse APIs); (3) many of the attendees are at the wrong
knowledge level to do the exercises effectively. (Note that there have
been successful hands-on tutorials so these are not 100%.)
So I like this idea. In fact, maybe we should change the tutorials to two
kinds: Very Long Talks (2 Hours; 3 per day) and Hands On Workshops (all
day; 1 per day). The HOW could then be smaller and have sufficient time
to really do a programming exercise. The HOW would be sort of a plug-in
clinic about one specific topic.
Richard Gronback wrote:
Re: Suggestion for tutorials Hi Doug,
I don’t think it’s a bad idea, although I personally feel tutorials should
be hands-on and not just a long(er) talk. In reality, not all who
attend tutorials come prepared to actually do hands-on activities, which