Kevin,
Nice pickup there. Originally there were two categories: one for
Business, another for Industry. Somewhere along the line I transposed
or collapsed the categories. For some reason I thought that each
category had 5 shorts and 2 longs for a total of 6 hours of Bus. &
Ind.
I would propose taking one long talk from TPTP and giving it to
Business & Industry. Does that make it better? Does anyone else
have a long talk that they would like to donate to business and
industry?
Scott
Kevin McGuire wrote:
(btw, that email was queued since
last
week but was travelling and couldn't get access to email, so sorry it
came
after the call)
Agree. The allocations need to
reflect:
1) the topics for which people will
submit talks
2) what is of interest to the
community
I've never done this before, but I
wonder
though if there's a tendency to fill the time allocations.
Wrt the business track, the one talk
I went to was packed beyond capacity (Tim Wagner's). What I liked
about his talk was that it got me thinking of something I wouldn't have
otherwise. This happy surprise learning is what I always hope for in a
conference. We're a technical crowd for sure but we all also make
a living at it, so if the talks are quality then I'd imagine some
interest
is there (and Tim's suggests there is). Plus there's lots in the
community, some on this very mail list, who consult, do courses, etc.,
so its not like we don't have people with a (vested) business interest
on the floor already.
EclipseWorld is a whole other thing
and many of us don't go. I'd just like to ensure that we're not
accidentally
missing out on another important aspect of Eclipse, one which is
essential
to its long term health. As an aside, sometimes I think we regard
"business" as a dirty word in Eclipse!
With such a small allocation, I
wonder
if its self fulfilling, and we subconsciously don't encourage the
submissions
of this topic? (Again, new at this, and no slight intended to the past
owners of this topic).
Kevin
yeah, it is hard to get these allocations right. One
approach is to treat the current numbers as guidelines/current
thinking.
With the global focus on having really great talks, there is no point,
for example, in accepting mediocre talks just because well ahead time
we
thought it would be good to have N hours of topic T.
Jeff
Ed Merks wrote:
Kevin,
I agree with some of the concerns about allocations. But I know that
the reporting newsgroup has among the highest traffic of all the
newsgroups
while SOA and TPTP seem to generate only a trickle. I'm not sure
that's a reflective of how many folks would turn out for related talks
though. Chris and I did a committer track talk last year and the
turnout was quite small. If slots are in short supply, ones focused
on technical material seem to be a better use, in my opinion. I also
agree with you about the business thing, but I wonder about the
conference
audience itself. For example, I imagine that Eclipse World would
have a much larger draw to a business track focus while EclipseCon has
a much smaller business crowd to draw on. I have no real factual
basis for that comment though. Perhaps we've done surveys about the
demographics of the audience? There's no point in having
business-focused
talks if the geeks stay away in droves. I get the sense that C++
is extremely popular (again from the newsgroup traffic) but I wonder
about
it being equal to that of Java. At the same time, is there all that
much to say about Java that hasn't been said?
I suppose that for any of these things, if the slots are really over
allocated,
that will become clear by the number of quality submissions; unused
slots
will be obviously redistributed...
Kevin McGuire wrote:
- I'm happy with Platform ext
and Platform
int.
- I like the broad
categorizations.
- The overall ext splits seems
good
- 8hrs seems a lot for Reporting
which
is just one specific area (e.g. compared to SOA at 9hr which could be
massive).
Same comment for Test and Performance at 10.
- Note sure what happens in 8hrs
for committer
and contributor, seems high.
- Meanwhile, business and
industry seems
under represented at mere 3hrs, which could be quite broad. Eclipse
is only successful if it can be applied commercially (so we can all
continue
to get paid :>). I'm thinking things like success stories or
challenges
in building commercial Eclipse based applications, industry comparisons
and trends, etc. Is the issue here of audience, or that we tend not to
get submissions in this area?
Overall happy, the only one I feel at all strongly about is Business
and
Industry.
Kevin
All,
I think we reached consensus that it would be a good idea to have a
simplified
version of the external description of the EclipseCon categories. I
have re-worked the category descriptions a bit and filled in some
misses
from the first round. The re-worked categories are up on the spread-sheet
plus I have just copied them into the email for your convenience.
At this point, I just want to work with total hours of presentation
time,
once we get agreement that the categories are correctly named and we
have
the allocations appropriately balanced, I will take a stab at the
Tutorial,
Long, Main Stage, and Short Talk allocations. If you feel your
category
is not getting appropriate representation, now is the time to speak up.
NOTE: I added 8 hours to the total to take in account the addition of
the
Linux DevCon
Additional questions:
1) Do the External Category Descriptions (first column in Bold)
make sense?
2) Do we have the right balance between the various External Categories?
3) Did I miss any internal categories?
4) Do the internal category names make sense?
5) Is the balance good for the internal categories?
Finally, I wanted to share a personal milestone with all of you. Today
was our last big "First Day Of School". Both of my kids,
Sam (pre-k) and Louise (1st grade) are now in school. Like
most proud parents we had to take a picture, nice photo except for the
goon in the blue shirt.
scott
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
|
