From:
dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Mark Rogalski
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2007 12:02 PM
To: DSDP PMC list
Cc: DSDP PMC list; dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [dsdp-pmc] EclipseCon 08 - votes for Embedded / Mobile
Category
Thanks for the
data. Certainly looks like we're not being treated unfairly. I see a lot
of unused short talk time though. We either need to convert some of the short
talk time back to long talk (which would provide for 10 more long talks), or
convert some long talks into short talks. For that I guess we need to see if
presenters are still willing to come just for a short talk.
I also see that
the Industry category has two unused slots. I'm not sure exactly what that
category means, but if it is for non-committers who use Eclipse projects for an
industry solution, I think some of the proposed DSDP talks fit that category.
For instance, 336 and 473. If we can off-load at least one of these, that would
give us another slot.
Mark
|
"Gaff,
Doug" <doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by:
dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
11/26/2007
09:23 AM
|
Please respond to
DSDP PMC list <dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
|
To
|
"DSDP
PMC list" <dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
RE:
[dsdp-pmc] EclipseCon 08 - votes for Embedded / Mobile Category
|
|
Hi
Mark,
Yes,
that’s correct. This was pretty consistent for the top level
projects. Bjorn is pushing for much more short talks this year, and each
top level project got a lot of short talks. Here are the stats. The
first number is the number of submissions and the second is the number of
allocations. We can fight for an additional long talk slot from the
reserved pool, but clearly there will be lots of folks asking for that.
As you can see, everyone is massively over allocated.
Doug
|
Category
|
Long
Talk
|
Short
Talk
|
Tutorial
|
%
|
|
Business
|
19 / 5
|
2 / 5
|
0 / 0
|
70.0%
|
|
C/C++
|
6 / 2
|
1 / 5
|
1 / 3
|
40.0%
|
|
Data
Tooling
|
3 / 3
|
1 / 5
|
4 / 3
|
63.6%
|
|
Director's
Choice
|
1 / 2
|
0 / 0
|
0 / 0
|
50.0%
|
|
Emerging
Technologies
|
19 / 5
|
9 / 20
|
8 / 3
|
60.7%
|
|
Industry
|
0 / 2
|
0 / 10
|
0 / 0
|
0.0%
|
|
Java
|
7 / 4
|
5 / 5
|
4 / 3
|
100.0%
|
|
Mobile
and Embedded
|
11 / 4
|
10 / 10
|
6 / 3
|
100.0%
|
|
Modeling
|
18 / 5
|
19 / 10
|
15 / 8
|
100.0%
|
|
Committer
and Contributor
|
7 / 4
|
8 / 5
|
2 / 3
|
91.7%
|
|
OSGi
DevCon
|
21 / 4
|
11 / 10
|
9 / 6
|
100.0%
|
|
Other
|
10 / 2
|
7 / 5
|
6 / 0
|
100.0%
|
|
Eclipse
as a Platform
|
17 / 4
|
8 / 10
|
11 / 9
|
91.3%
|
|
Rich
Client Platform
|
20 / 4
|
19 / 10
|
18 / 9
|
100.0%
|
|
Reporting
|
5 / 4
|
5 / 5
|
3 / 3
|
100.0%
|
|
SOA
|
9 / 4
|
10 / 5
|
2 / 3
|
91.7%
|
|
Test
and Performance
|
14 / 4
|
1 / 10
|
4 / 6
|
45.0%
|
|
Tools
|
25 / 4
|
6 / 10
|
8 / 3
|
76.5%
|
|
Web
Tools
|
11 / 5
|
7 / 10
|
8 / 9
|
83.3%
|
|
Used
vs. Allocated Slots
|
68 / 71
|
100 / 150
|
67 / 74
|
79.7%
|
|
95.8%
|
66.7%
|
90.5%
|
|
Submissions
vs. Total Slots
|
223 / 80
|
129 / 160
|
109 / 80
|
144.1%
|
|
278.8%
|
80.6%
|
136.3%
|
From:
dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mark
Rogalski
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2007 8:25 PM
To: DSDP PMC list
Cc: DSDP PMC list; dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [dsdp-pmc] EclipseCon 08 - votes for Embedded / Mobile
Category
Doug,
Do I understand correctly that there are only 4 long talk slots available for
device/embedded topics? Considering how Eclipse has been trying to emphasize
embedded more, this seems rather restrictive. Do you have the breakdown on what
other top level projects are getting? Also, are there any stats on the number
of proposals submitted vs slots available?
Mark
|
"Gaff,
Doug" <doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: dsdp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
11/21/2007
03:20 PM
|
Please respond to
DSDP PMC list <dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
|
To
|
"DSDP
PMC list" <dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
[dsdp-pmc]
EclipseCon 08 - votes for Embedded / Mobile Category
|
|
Hi PMC,
I’ve setup voting for the Category:
http://wiki.eclipse.org/DSDP/PMC/EclipseCon08_Votes
Please add your votes here. We may need to discuss some of these talks
further next week.
Doug
_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc_______________________________________________
dsdp-pmc mailing list
dsdp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/dsdp-pmc
