| Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Talks on scoping |
I agree that the „rogue-bundles“ abstract has more details in it. My hope is that the virgo guys have a lot insight into the topic with these many bundles applications.
I just emailed Glyn directly and got a “out of office” reply. He is not back before the 12th (so I emailed the contact persons in the out of office mail, not sure what they are going to do). It explains why we don’t see responses.
They are now both standard talks so I don’t think that makes any difference. (the virgo talk was submitted as extended but we reduced that anyway)
I’d vote for having them both (and rather remove talks from the end if we need talk slots for vertical talks that Ralph might be in favour of) but I can certainly life if we only accept the “rogue bundles” talk.
christian
Von: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Simon Kaufmann
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 7. September 2011 09:25
An: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
Betreff: Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Talks on scoping
I'd vote for this talk only:
Reasons:
- better abstract
- Standard talk
- He is responsive (i.e. even approached the other talk to join)
- The other talk did not respond on 3 comments
Simon
2011/9/6 Bernd Kolb <b.kolb@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Hi,
We have two talks which look pretty similar:
Do we want to keep both?
Bernd
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee