[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] Long Talk and Panel final roundup
|
For the Java track, I think the suggested choices are not optimal, since we
would end up with no talk about user experience.
Ideally, I think the distribution of Java presentations should look like.
1. one talk on Java in general
2. one talk on JDT
3. one talk on user experience with Eclipse Java tools
4. one talk on other topic (tooling or dev practices)
We have already accepted submissions for (1) and (2) (see below with
'====>' prefix).
1. one talk on Java in general
=======>[3727] Java 7 Language Features
[3825] Threads, java.util.concurrent and Eclipse Jobs: problems and
solutions
2. one talk on Eclipse JDT
=======>[3786] Unleash the Power of Refactorings in your Products!
3. one talk on user experience
[3768] Apache Harmony: Developing the Java platform with Eclipse
[3812] Java 5.0: A developer experience
[3888] Story from the Trenches: Migrating from C++ to Eclipse
4. one talk on tooling topic or dev practices
[3650] The Fine Art of Reverse Engineering
[3723] Runtime monitoring and adaptation of applications from Eclipse
To me, it looks that we should pick one talk for (3) and one for (4).
My personal inclination would be respectively: [3768] and [3650].
3768 - because Harmony is an interesting exercize which brings together
Eclipse JDT and OSGi bundles.
3650 - not quite sure it is in the right track, but it has the most votes.
For 3825, I think it is interesting too, but I suspect it has little to do
with Eclipse per se, and we already have one submission about Java in
general (Java7) which I believe is more important. If we had one more slot
in Java track, then yes I would agree with this one, since the speaker is a
good one.
Any thoughts?
Richard Gronback
<richard.gronback
@borland.com> To
Sent by: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
eclipse.org-eclip <eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-com
secon-program-com mittee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
mittee-bounces@ec cc
lipse.org
Subject
Re:
01/08/2007 02:43 [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-com
AM mittee] Long Talk and Panel final
roundup
Please respond to
Eclipsecon
Program Committee
list
<eclipse.org-ecli
psecon-program-co
mmittee@eclipse.o
rg>
The slot below makes 4 for OSGi, not 3. The sooner we can resolve Java,
OSGi, and RCP tracks the better (tomorrow would be good).
Thanks,
Rich
On 1/7/07 8:39 PM, "Jeff McAffer" <Jeff_McAffer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Rich wrote on 01/07/2007 04:41:43 PM:
> As we’re already past our deadline and soon need to start reviewing
> short talks and demos, I plan to do the following in order to
finish
> up our long talk & panel selections and schedule rooms (speak now
if
> you object, or better, resolve your tracks asap :)
>
> Panels:
> 1. Reclaim the panel slots from C++, Reporting, RCP, and Tools, as
> they have no submissions.
In RCP we are still trying to come up with a panel that touches on
aspects of the talks that could not be accepted.
> 2. Allocate one to Fundamentals and accept both of its submissions
-
> 3757: What sucks about Eclipse (2 PC votes, 1 community vote) &
> 3891: How we learned to stop worrying and love Eclipse UA (1 PC
> vote, 16 community votes)
> 3. Accept OSGi panel 3900: What does the future hold for OSGi? (2
PC
> votes, 4 community votes)
I believe that Peter has been working on creating an OSGi panel from
some rejected talks...
> 4. Accept Web panel 3747: What does Eclipse need to do to become
the
> IDE for AJAX?
> 5. Decline the rest. This gives us 10 panels overall, and frees up
> some space we may need on Thursday due to a potential room
conflict.
>
> Long Talks:
> 1. In the Java track, accept 3650: The fine art of reverse
> engineering (3 PC votes, 1 community vote) & 3825: Threads, java.
> util.concurrent and Eclipse Jobs: problems and solutions (1 PC
vote,
> 2 community votes).
> 2. In the OSGi track, accept 3705: Using OSGi back-end system for
> the purpose of enterprise management of Eclipse IDEs
It would be great if we could rustle up an additional slot for OSGi.
There is lots of stuff to talk about and currently only 3 slots
including the extra one mentioned here.
> 3. In the RCP track, accept 3628: Rich client platforms: Eclipse
RCP
> compared with NetBeans Platform (2 PC votes, 13 community votes);
> 3816: How to make your RCP application NOT look like Eclipse (1 PC
> vote, 4 community votes)
The RCP track subcommittee is still reviewing and debating. We'll
resolve in the next couple days.
> 4. In the SOA track, accept 3882: STP Components (2 PC votes);
3887:
> From modeling to execution in the enterprise – using BPMN and BPEL
> (2 PC votes)
> 5. In the Web track, accept 3869: XML Development Tools in Eclipse
> WTP and beyond (1 PC vote, 1 community vote)
> 6. Decline the rest. This gives us 67 with another one (or two)
> coming to Mike’s Director’s Choice track
Jeff
_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
--
Richard C. Gronback
Borland Software Corporation
richard.gronback@xxxxxxxxxxx
+1 860 227 9215_______________________________________________
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee
