[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Category Revisions
|
+1
Darin Wright
Scott Rosenbaum <scottr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent by: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
09/19/2008 02:50 PM
Please respond to
Eclipsecon Program Committee list
<eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To
Eclipsecon Program Committee list
<eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
cc
Subject
Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Category Revisions
I agree that all of the category assignments are a little suspect. Do you
favor those communities that are the most active? Or do you give the nod
to communities that are struggling to move forward?
One of the ideas of having the un-allocated talks was that there would be
committee consensus on more of the talks. If a category gets extra talks
it would be based on having the best possible talk submissions, as voted
by the committee. This year we have 20% of the time un-allocated. (9
Longs, 1 Main Stage, 10 Tutorials).
If you all feel that the balance is really out of whack, then I would
propose taking one long talk from each of the category and put them into
the un-allocated bucket. Taking away one long talk from each category
would give us (27 Longs, 1 Main Stage, 10 Tutorials) in un-allocated. The
problem with this approach is we would have to reach consensus on 38 slots
which would take a lot more work.
That is not the only solution, I am open to any proposals, but my vote
would be to leave things as they are. Let me know what you think.
+1 to accept the categories as they are
-1 to try and change the allocations to a better balance.
Scott
Schaefer, Doug wrote:
I knew that would get an LOL out of Mike ;)
Well, the valley is also a hotbed of embedded and Embedded Systems
Conference can attest to. And we actually get good attendence to Eclipse
talks there, when we can get them. I think we can get these guys to come
to EclipseCon if we have a good program for them. But I guess that's our
job to figure out.
Doug.
From: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [
mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mike Milinkovich
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2008 10:32 AM
To: 'Eclipsecon Program Committee list'
Subject: RE: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Category Revisions
| Where is Eclipse headed? I'd bet that's harder to answer than you think,
and I'm not sure there's any one individual who would know, except for
maybe Mike.
I literally LOL’d on that one. I have guesses on where it’s heading.
Perhaps my guesses are a little better informed than yours, but they’re
still guesses.
Communities don’t head in a particular direction. They evolve. Evolution
is hard to predict J
| Interestingly enough, I find ESE has a much higher embedded attendance
percentage than EclipseCon. How does that happen? Culture?
| Demographics? Awesome recruiting by Ralph?
It is partially location and demographics. The Stuttgart area is very
automotive-driven. My observation is also that small software companies in
Europe are much more likely to be focused on systems engineering than
enterprise. I think this is partially because of the large number of
systems engineering companies in Europe.
_______________________________________________
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
