I
have somehow got myself completely out of sorts – was there not supposed to be
a call this morning? I was on, but it did not seem to
happen.
I
just assumed that Business & Industry were 3 hours each, so a total of
6h. Last year there were only a few shorts, and it didn’t seem to
attract many folks. Given the reduction in the program, going from 7
(5biz+2ind) to 6 didn’t seem bad to me, given I still think we have 50% too
many talks allocated. ;-)
-
Don
From:
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Scott Rosenbaum
Sent: September 8, 2008 2:43
PM
To: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
Subject: Re:
[eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Category
Revisions
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
