Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Reconsidering Talksdiscus

["Campo, Christian" <Christian.Campo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]



I have also receive some feedback that limiting talks by company is rather uncommon. More common is to limit by speaker and topic.

What do others think ?

Gruesse

Christian

Am 18.08.2012 um 10:50 schrieb "Alexander Nyßen" <alexander.nyssen@xxxxxxxxx>:

Hi guys,

if we have the problem of getting good talks in, then I would agree to limit the number of talks we accept per person/company, while dropping good talks in order to include bad ones IMHO sounds a bit strange. 

In general I more agree to limiting the number of talks we accept per individual person (because I think we should try to reach a diversity of speakers) than to limiting the number of the talks we accept per company (and I do not say this because I am unaffacted in the first and affected in the latter case). In case the contributions related to a company are provided by different people and are dealing with different topics (which is mostly the case with itemis, where people from EMF, RMF, GEF, Sphinx, and Xtext/Xtend are involved), people should probably not be discriminated because they work for the same employer. However, if this is to be done to indicate that we strongly encourage diversity, I can live with that. As I am personally affected I will however not vote for any itemis talks to drop and will thus leave this to you guys. Concerning the Obeo talk and Christian's proposal (Why is OSGi dynamic), I would agree to the selections.

Concerning the "Desktop apps...", "Jnario...", and "Now that I've Got a Model..." extended talks, I would opt for leaving them all extended. I am personally convinced that a good program manifests itself in quality, not quantity. As such, I would rather spend additional time for "quality" talks than trying to include as much talks as we can.

Cheers

Alexander

Am 17.08.2012 um 11:43 schrieb Martin Lippert:

Hey!

*Reduction options so far:*

We have recovered a standard talk slot which was simply incorrect data

in the table thanks to Martin....

*Martin*mention to reduce *“Desktop apps*....” “*Jnario*....” “*Now that

I’ve Got a Model*...” from extended to standard and reject one talk from

itemis and one from Sebastian.

*Christian*(myself) offered to give away “*Why is OSGi dynamic* ?” “

+1

*Cedric*offered to give away “*Chocolate Based Development*”

+1

I am also thinking about joining my talk:
http://www.eclipsecon.org/europe2012/sessions/embracing-eclipse-orion

with this one:
http://www.eclipsecon.org/europe2012/sessions/orion-integrations

I think it would make sense from the content side. I will reach out to Szymon and ask him if that would be possible.

Cheers,
-Martin


_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee

--
Dr. Alexander Nyßen
Dipl.-Inform.
Software-Engineer

Telefon: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-210
Telefax: +49 (0) 231 / 98 60-211
Mobil: +49 (0) 151 /  17396743

http://www.itemis.de 
alexander.nyssen@xxxxxxxxx 

itemis AG
Am Brambusch 15-24
44536 Lünen

Rechtlicher Hinweis:

Amtsgericht Dortmund, HRB 20621

Vorstand: Jens Wagener (Vors.), Wolfgang Neuhaus, Dr. Georg Pietrek, Jens Trompeter, Sebastian Neus

Aufsichtsrat: Dr. Burkhard Igel (Vors.), Stephan Grollmann, Michael Neuhaus

<ATT00001..c>

-------------------------------------------------------------
compeople AG
Untermainanlage 8
60329 Frankfurt/Main

fon: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 0
fax: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 22
web: www.compeople.de

Vorstand: Jürgen Wiesmaier
Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Christian Glanz

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt/Main
Handelsregister Frankfurt HRB 56759
USt-IdNr. DE207665352
-------------------------------------------------------------