From: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
Ian Skerrett
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 5:39 PM
To: eclipsecon-na-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] 5's
fwiw, the specifically labeled the allocation 'rough' since I expected it not to be exact.
On 11/23/2011 1:49 PM, John Arthorne wrote:
I guess in the end we can only pick 63, given the five early birds and two director picks. Also note your list has 20 for tools/other but Ian's
only had 18.
Based on our review today of the available submissions, I definitely think we need to give more to Tools. I'll just throw out how I would allocate FWIW, based on the submissions we have (obviously
Doug and Ian have the final say here). Basically this removes 4 from modelling, 2 from mobile, and gives 6 more to tools/other.
Modelling - 15 + 1 early bird
Platform - 9 + 1 early bird
Mobile - 8
Tools/Other - 22 + 2 early bird
RT - 9 + 1 early bird
John
BTW, here’s the breakdown by category of talks with > 3.5.
Modelling – 8 / 20
Platform – 8 / 10
Mobile – 3 / 10
Tools, Comm, Cool – 37 / 20
Eclipse RT – 7 / 10
From:
eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Schaefer, Doug
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 10:45 AM
To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions
Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] 5's
Agreed, and we have already started the horse trading.
By five, I mean talks with a five vote but has been dragged down by a number of 2 and 3 votes. I’m just trying to figure out what that means. We’ll go through some examples at the
meeting.
Doug.
From:
eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Chris Aniszczyk
Sent: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 10:40 AM
To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions
Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] 5's
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 7:18 AM, Schaefer, Doug <Doug.Schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
It’s easy to look yourselves. Just sort by PC Vote and see what the top 63 are. Right now there’s a big tie at 3.5. And we’re heavy in Tools and light in most of the others, which
is pretty normal since Tools is a grab bag.
I’m still munching through some things to see how I want to present the list. I’ll set up a webex for the meeting and we can look together.
Last year we went through the "5's" fairly quickly. It was difficult to get the last 25% or so talks finalized... but that's always how it is. I think people should be prepared to do some horse-trading if they have some talks they really want to get in.
--
Cheers,
Chris Aniszczyk
http://aniszczyk.org
+1 512 961 6719_______________________________________________
eclipsecon-na-program-committee mailing list
eclipsecon-na-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipsecon-na-program-committee
_______________________________________________
eclipsecon-na-program-committee mailing list
eclipsecon-na-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipsecon-na-program-committee
