Thanks, Doug.
I’m not sure about votes on accepted talks, as there were some accepted
in
WebTools when I went through the list that would have felt odd to vote
on after
the fact. I guess it’s OK either way.
FWIW, the Modeling PMC discussed our submissions and put our thoughts
in our
minutes: http://wiki.eclipse.org/index.php/Modeling_PMC_Meeting%2C_2006-12-19
Best,
Rich
On 12/19/06 2:48 PM, "Gaff, Doug" <doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Sorry for my
holiday bias…it made the best
rhyme.
I just finished reviewing all (most) of the submissions. I skipped a
couple of
the finished tracks as well as areas that might expose my incompetence.
J
Meta comment: I didn’t see a lot of PC votes. That’s not surprising.
There
weren’t a lot last year, since most of the decisions were made on the
phone.
This year, we’re pretty track-focused, which might make the problem
worse. Rich & Bjorn: as a matter of procedure, should there be PC
votes on accepted tracks?
General comment: I hope we can get some “user” talks into the track
content.
I didn’t see a lot of votes on user talks, e.g. “I used RCP too do
XXX”.
Peter Kriens: There are two similar proposals from folks from bandxi:
one
in embedded/mobile and one in OSGi. See this comment <http://eclipsezilla.eclipsecon.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3814#c6>
. I’ve asked for clarification. Do you know anything about these talks?
Doug
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
--
Richard C. Gronback
Borland Software Corporation
richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1 860 227 9215
