Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] Finished voting

["Schaefer, Doug" <Doug.Schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I only see two Ceylon submissions. I’m ok with the idea. But I’d prefer the talk about how they built an IDE for it. That is more relevant to the Eclipse audience IMHO.

 

http://www.eclipsecon.org/2012/sessions/behind-scenes-ceylon-ide

 

:D

 

From: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sven Efftinge
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 3:44 PM
To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions
Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] Finished voting

 

While we are at it:

 

I think we should accept at least one of the three Ceylon submissions.

My favorite is Ceylon - the language and its tools which currently has a 3.4 (I voted 5).

 

Sven

 

On Nov 22, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Schaefer, Doug wrote:

Thanks, John. Agreed. Are there other talks you guys see that we should be taking another look at? The JRebel one was a good one too. Let’s keep that going and make sure we’re not missing anything.

 

:D

 

From: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Arthorne
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 2:56 PM
To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions
Cc: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions; eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] Finished voting

 

> "Schaefer, Doug" <Doug.Schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
> Sent by: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> I definitely take into account number of votes as well, 4 actually 
> being the threshold where I start to wonder about the result. A talk
> with 8 votes makes me wonder as well, especially the 3 factor I 
> mentioned earlier. But it all depends on the context. For example 8 
> people voted for the LTTng tracing talk which is actually an 
> important new area in Linux tools and CDT. I voted 5 and the average
> sits at 3.25. Not sure what to make of that. 

That's probably an example of a talk falling through the cracks... (7*3 + 5)/8 = 3.25.  I know I gave it a 3 because it seemed fine but not amazing. It felt like a bit of a niche "what's new in LTTng" talk. Based on your input that this is an important new area for CDT/LinuxTools I've bumped my vote up to 4. I definitely think it's worth bringing up talks that you think didn't get a fair assessment on this list and we can revise. 

John

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