| RE: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] EclipseConProgramCommittee Action Required: need another long talk |
|
I vote for 204. As I mentioned in a prior post, Jeff McAffer apologized for
being so late about picking 204 and was willing to accept its exclusion. But now
that we have a slot, I think we should try to honor that pick from RCP.
Paul VanderLei
Embedded Java Enablement Team
1750 Ridgemoor SE
Grand Rapids, MI 49506
616.975.1985
pvlei@xxxxxxxxxx
"I don't see architecture coming from you." -Jerry Seinfeld
Monday, January 30, 2006 12:06 PM To: "Eclipsecon Program Committee list" <eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx> cc: From: "Tim Wagner" <twagner@xxxxxxx> Subject: RE: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] EclipseConProgramCommittee Action Required: need another long talk I should also mention
that I listed 204 because it was explained to me (too late to do anything about
it before) that this had actually been a “high priority” entry on the RCP theme
list we reviewed, but we didn’t know that at the time and passed over it in our
selections. I’ve gotten several
other “why didn’t you include XXX”, but mostly these were from the submitters.
PHP was another notable omission, but the EMO used one of their slots to include
that. Otherwise, I haven’t heard shock or surprise expressed about any holes in
our current program. I also searched for a
more direct “replacement” talk on EMF experiences, but didn’t find any; if I
missed something, that would be another obvious option for a
substitute. From:
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gaff, Doug Of the list below, I
like 204 the best. But, it doesn’t seem fair to favor that instead of 40,
which made our final short list. We could agree to
revote on the list below. From:
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tim Wagner Program Committee
Members, The submitters of long talk #162,
“Using EMF to Develop a Developer-friendly Framework” have withdrawn their talk
due to professional obligations that will require them to be outside the
As such, we need another submission
to fill this slot (currently Wednesday, March 22nd at
2:15). Some
options: http://canuck.gda.itesm.mx/eclipsezilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40 40: Probing Java
Application Behavior with Probekit (TPTP). was our runner up in
the last round of voting, with 4 PC votes. http://canuck.gda.itesm.mx/eclipsezilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204 204: Go Wild with RCP: Anatomy of an
RCP-based Smart Client Application was another RCP talk that we
declined with some regret, since Nick is the RCP UI lead and would be a great
person to have present on RCP. Excluding certain “irregular” votes,
the top community votes in our declined stack are http://canuck.gda.itesm.mx/eclipsezilla/show_bug.cgi?id=283 283: Developing RCP applications; an
experience report (17 community votes) 40: See above. (11 community
votes) http://canuck.gda.itesm.mx/eclipsezilla/show_bug.cgi?id=75 75: Building Code Analysis Tools
using the CDT DOM (9 community votes) I’d like to close on a replacement
ASAP since we need to let someone know that they’re on the hook to deliver a
long talk with only a few weeks left before the deadline. If you’d like to
nominate additional submissions, please respond to the mailing list on Monday;
I’d like to then do a vote by email on Tuesday. Finally, a reminder that we have a
call this Friday, 10am-noon PST, to close on short talks. Please be
reviewing/categorizing the short talks between now and
then. Thanks, -t |