RE: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Tutorial voting, round 1

["Doddapaneni, Srinivas P" <srinivas.p.doddapaneni@xxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry for late voting.

 

Thanks,

-Sri

---

From: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Wagner
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 10:57 PM
To: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
Subject: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Tutorial voting, round 1

 

All PC members,

 

Please vote on the attached tutorial list. You have 25 “yes” votes (please put a ‘1’ in the “Votes” column) and an unlimited number of “no” votes (please put a -1 in the “Votes” column). Votes are due Wednesday, November 9^th; email a copy of the spreadsheet with your votes to the distribution list and I will summarize and report by COB Thursday. No write-ins are permitted, but you’re welcome to solicit a talk you think is missing and bring it to the PC’s attention for round 2.

 

Talks at or near unanimous consent will simply go into the program – this will enable us to begin advertising early. Talks receiving negative votes or marginal support will be discussed in our call next week. (We are permitted to defer finalizing some tutorials so long as we have the bulk of the selection done by 11/15 in order to begin advertising activities.) Also, Bjorn updated me on the number of slots: Review of the venue indicates that we have 30 (rather than 36 as previously stated) slots (excluding “sponsored” slots over which we have no purview) to program for tutorials.

 

A few notes on the spreadsheet:

• I added my own perception of the “dev/user” categorization, based on PC conversations – many of the talks switched to “user” from “dev”.
• The beginner/intermediate/advanced categorization is entirely mine, and you’re welcome to disregard it. I found it most useful when comparing talks with similar topics / project affiliations on a pairwise basis, since there is no absolute standard to go by (and in some cases the abstracts were rather terse).
• Feel free to suggest additional virtual tracks (they’ll need to go into Bugzilla, but this spreadsheet is a handy way to view them w.r.t. the tutorial program).
• I’ll fill in the “required?” columns as I receive word from the top-level project leads; WTP’s response is already in there. As we agreed on the call, ignore this for now in your voting, and we’ll deal with problems on an as-needed basis.

 

Thanks,

 

-t

 

Attachment: EclipseCon06 Tutorials Sri.xls
Description: EclipseCon06 Tutorials Sri.xls