| RE: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Tutorials Suggestion |
|
I was sitting here thinking the same thing. The challenge is that adding more talk-slots, means adding more
budget – and it’s not likely at this stage. Moreover, there are some operational concerns for Monday AM that
we (meaning the Foundation and Organizers) need to be prepared for, so need to
keep that flexibility. -
Don From: Content-filter at
foundation.eclipse.org [mailto:postmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Doug Schaefer +1 And actually given the
crunch, I'd propose we make all tutorials 120 minutes and open up more talk
slots. I'm thinking with all the things going on at Eclipse as represented by
all the submissions we got, making EclipseCon more of a sampler than a place to
spend a 3 hour tutorial at might be worth considering. On Wed, Jan 6, 2010 at 1:50 PM, Donald Smith <donald.smith@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: Hi, Looking
at all the tutorials: I
would suggest that we look at the tutorials as a group, and not try to get
caught up in the “extended 180” versus “Regular 120”
distinction at this point. I.e., I would have all the accepted tutorials assume
they have 120 minutes only – and a lucky 5 we determine later will get
the extra hour on Monday AM. BTW
– Looking at the tutorial (only, as a group) submissions, I notice 1425
as an example of a tutorial that goes out of it’s way to show off Eclipse
as an end-to-end solution. It pulls in Jetty, EclipseLInk, Equinox on the
RT side, and Dali, PDE and WTP on the Tools side showing an end-to-ender.
My worry is that it’s an example of the kind of submission that can get
lost if we get locked into the various silos. Just throwing it out there. -
Don Come
to EclipseCon -- March 22-25 http://eclipsecon.org/
Donald
Smith Director
of Ecosystem Development Eclipse
Foundation, Inc. P:+1
613 224 9461 x231 C:+1
613 292 5160 F:+1
212 918 1619
|