Hard to get beer through the wires, but
here are some thoughts I had (some of which I’ve already shared w/
Bjorn):
- Archive the email list. Many of
the discussions simply do not map onto individual talks, which is part of
the problem we had with “exposing” more of the process this
time around – it’s just not possible to go into 50 different
talks and copy a transcription of an email paragraph that might be in some
way relevant to them. The concern with doing this was that keynote speaker
discussions might be sensitive, but there was a fairly distinct period in which
we discussed those, and after that archiving could be turned on.
- Enable abstracts in EclipseZilla search results. This
would be messy, but occasionally very useful (and saves a ton of
click-throughs).
- Clarify what voting (community and PC) means up
front. (I still don’t understand exactly what PC
votes were supposed to mean ;-).
- Track short talks. We didn’t
have any hallway collisions that required medical attention, but this was
a complaint I heard several times.
- Dispense with user/developer distinction. But
keep business track separate as a concept.
- Use Bugzilla to enable PMCs to select their talks. This
would be more transparent and would avoid having the poor PC chair
emailing them repeatedly.
- Add something to Bugzilla to track “project
association”. We spent a great deal of time
reengineering which talks went w/ which projects in an effort to get
balance and coverage. I would go two levels down for technology, tools,
and platform.
- Get virtual track recommendations in early, and
use Bugzilla for them. I’m thinking of RCP and
embedded this year – it was much easier once we had them in the
system.
- Decide the allocation up front. It’s
not a good use of time to go over the ground rules again and again. I
would suggest next year’s PC establish the long/short talk ratio and
“Thursday length decision” up front (or maybe not even be
given a choice in the matter) and then spend its time on programming to those
constraints.
- Accept that community involvement and ultimate
transparency of decision making are two different things. I’m
totally pro involving the community (a la Amazon) – the more info,
awareness, and engagement we can get with the conference, program, and
submissions, the better. But short of transcribing every phone call and copying
each transcript into every submission in EclipseZilla, the process will
never be a fully transparent one, and I’m not sure that the extreme
cost of achieving that level of transparency is ultimately worth it –
the choice to have a PC versus simply an election process necessarily
means that individual and group aesthetics play a part in the final answer
– it’s misleading to suggest to the community that every
pairwise “why X and not Y” question will be answered.
And one suggestion for the conference at
large (because I’m too lazy to go record it elsewhere): Keep the doors to
the vendor floor open (even if you have to rope them off for crowd control
purposes). Maybe even have a table of food *outside*
the doors to help lead people in...
From:
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lawrence Mandel
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 9:15
PM
To: Eclipsecon Program Committee
list
Subject: RE:
[eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Thank you!
I'm in for a post mortem.
One
thing I think the next PC should focus on is an even more open process. I'd
like to see the PC add comments on submissions rather than capture comments in
e-mails or spreadsheets. I think some reasoning behind a rejection decision
will go a long way to help people feel they didn't waste time on their
submission and help them improve future submissions. This will take some time
but should be manageable if the comments are added as decisions are made
(rather than all at the end).
I
agree with Ed's comments about setting up topics for short rooms ahead of time.
I read and heard a lot of complaints from people running from room to room
during the short talks, which, if I remember correctly, is exactly what Tim was
concerned would happen.
Lawrence Mandel
Software Developer
IBM Rational Software
Phone: 905 - 413 - 3814 Fax: 905 - 413 - 4920
lmandel@xxxxxxxxxx
|
"Gaff, Doug"
<doug.gaff@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent
by: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
03/28/2006 10:13 AM
|
Please
respond to
Eclipsecon Program Committee list
<eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
|
To
|
"Eclipsecon Program Committee list"
<eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Erin
Peterson" <Erin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Nancy
Wilson" <Nancy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
RE:
[eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Thank you!
|
|
+1 on all of these comments. Ok, enough
with the love fest. J
Would anyone be interested in doing a “post
mortem” on EclipseCon 2006, the role of the Program Committee,
Eclipsezilla, etc.? My experience with stuff like this is that it’s
better to talk about it right afterwards and take some great notes for the next
time. I’ve started writing some things down, but a group discussion
might be fun. (Beer would help.)
Any takers?
Doug
From: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Taylor
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2006 10:10 AM
To: Eclipsecon Program Committee list; Erin Peterson; Nancy Wilson
Cc: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
Subject: Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Thank you!
...and thanks to you, Tim! You organized and led the Program Committee to a
major success! IMHO EclipseCon 2006 was the best ever and it's significantly
due to your contributions. Great job!
Best,
MikeT
At 9:24 PM -0800 3/27/06, Tim Wagner wrote:
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C65227.EA5C1D60"
Nancy
and Erin,
Thank
you so much for your help in organizing the program, especially the last minute
details with the short talks. Your efforts and organizational skills really
made it possible to execute on our program, and I personally appreciate all
your support, time responses, and polite handling of exceptional cases.
Best
wishes,
Tim
Wagner, on behalf of the program committee
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
--
----------------------------------------
Mike Taylor
President and CEO
Instantiations, Inc.
Power Tools for Professional Software Developers
Voice: (503) 598-4911
mike_taylor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.instantiations.com_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing
list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
