Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] A balanced program.

["Ian Skerrett" <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

FWIW, I am not opposed to PC picks but I think it should be 1) you invited the speaker, and 2) so there is no conflict of interest the speaker is not employed by the same company or works on the same open source project.

 

Ian B and the PC in general will need to agree to this. Sorry for the confusion regarding invited speakers and pc picks.

 

Ian

 

 

From: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lars Vogel
Sent: November-18-13 3:42 PM
To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions
Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] A balanced program.

 

Ian, I did invite / encourages a few speaker to give talks and my personal pick would come out of that bucket. But I don't think the selection should be limited to invited speakers.

 

2013/11/18 Ian Skerrett <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>

I was equating Invited Talks = PC picks. I am all for having the PC bring in new an interesting speakers for the conference.

 

However, it seems you are thinking of something slightly different which I am sure we can discuss.

 

From: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lars Vogel
Sent: November-18-13 3:21 PM

To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions
Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] A balanced program.

 

Do we still have our PC pick, e.g., can the PC members still pick their personal favorite for the conference? I have not seen people making their pick but I think this would also help to make it a more interesting program. 

I assume that the PC members pick sessions which would be potentially excluded by average voting and that the program would get a little bit more exciting by certain controversial sessions.

 

Best regards, Lars 

 

2013/11/18 Ian Skerrett <ian.skerrett@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Vert.x is not included in the Eclipse RT number. If we can’t fill the 15 slots for Eclipse RT I am sure they can be used other places.

 

Btw, are you submitting a talk on the changes you are making for the next release of Equinox? They seem to be a pretty big deal? Also, what about asking Jan to do a session on concierge?

 

Regarding the gender balance issues, we can certainly talk about it during our call on Thursday. The first priority is to get the best program possible.

 

Ian

 

 

From: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas Watson
Sent: November-18-13 3:02 PM

To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions

Subject: Re: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] A balanced program.

 

For Eclipse RT are you counting vert.x day in that number.  I don't think we have nearly the correct number of submissions to get 15 quality Eclipse RT talks.  There may be a few that we could move over from other tracks to Eclipse RT (for example, Pascal you submitted the p2 talk under the PolarSys Day), but I don't think there will be a lot of these.

I don't want to seem gender insensitive, but I find it a bit biased to base rankings on gender.  If we want more Women to participate I think the best way is to get more Women to submit talks.

Tom



Ian Bull ---11/17/2013 11:55:50 PM---Ian S. and I have been talking about how to ensure we have a balanced program. For now, just focus o

From: Ian Bull <irbull@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: Eclipsecon NA program committee discussions <eclipsecon-na-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Date: 11/17/2013 11:55 PM
Subject: [eclipsecon-na-program-committee] A balanced program.
Sent by: eclipsecon-na-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Ian S. and I have been talking about how to ensure we have a balanced program. For now, just focus on voting on talks, but when we meet on Thursday, here are a few things to keep in mind.

Note: I'm sending this out to get some feedback. None of this is set in stone. Also, these are 'guidelines' and not 'hard numbers' -- Except for the first part... we have exactly 98 talks to accept.

1.      Distribution across tracks. We have 98 session slots to fill. Fyi, we reserve 2 slots for Mike to pick. I would suggest we target the following distribution across the tracks:

• Eclipse 4/RCP – 15 
• Eclipse RT – 15 
• Java Dev – 10
•  C/C++ Dev – 5
• JS Dev – 10 
• Modeling – 15
• Lifecycle tools – 15
• Other – 13

2.      Speaker Distribution – I would suggest one individual can give a maximum two talks (two talks plus 1 tutorial). If someone has more than this, we really sure evaluate why!

3.      Case Studies – We should have at least 2-3 end user case studies in each track.

4.      New speakers – we should try to make sure new speakers are given priority.

5.      Gender balanced – I’d like to see more women speaking so priority for women speakers. This might be controversial so I am open to opinions.

Cheers,
Ian

--
R. Ian Bull | EclipseSource Victoria | +1 250 477 7484
http://eclipsesource.com | http://twitter.com/eclipsesource _______________________________________________
eclipsecon-na-program-committee mailing list
eclipsecon-na-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipsecon-na-program-committee

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

 

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