Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] SOA Track

[Jonas Helming <jhelming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

+1

Am 31.07.2012 23:21, schrieb Campo, Christian:
> Thanks for getting this sorted out before the telco tomorrow…..
>
> +1
>
> christian
>
> Am 31.07.12 19:54 schrieb "Martin Lippert" unter <lippert@xxxxxxx>:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -Martin
> >
> >
> > > I like Achim's solution. We already have the tradition of a Modeling
> > > Symposium, which we know the community likes. The Modeling people decide
> > > what content to present in that 3.5 hour slot -- we schedule it and give
> > > it a room. It's easy to do the same thing for the SOA community.
> > >
> > > We could add the SOA Symposium to the tutorial pre-registration system,
> > > just like we do for the Modeling Symposium -- this gives it some
> > > visibility and allows it to be in the right room (re capacity).
> > >
> > > Anne Jacko
> > > Eclipse Foundation
> > > 503-784-3788 (cell)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Jul 31, 2012, at 9:08 AM, Achim Lörke wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > after reading the opinions of the others who commented I think the
> > > > opportunity for groups to gather community is important enough to
> > > > allow special sessions. I personally like the idea of symposia
> > > > (especially with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symposium in mind). So
> > > > let's take the free rooms, give one to the SOA guys, and ask around if
> > > > anyone else is up for a symposium.
> > > >
> > > > Achim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Quoting "Campo, Christian" <Christian.Campo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > <mailto:Christian.Campo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > We could have morning BoFs yes. We have as I remember from Anne about
> > > > > 3 additional small rooms during the Tutorial timeframe. (2
> > > > > Seminarrooms and WKZ which is the small half round room at the end
> > > > > above the entrance in the second floor)
> > > > >
> > > > > However we have to make sure that we dont split the concurrent
> > > > > sessions into too many pieces. 6 tutorials plus 3 BoFs so in total 9
> > > > > tracks sounds like a lot too me. But we could do that. I think it is
> > > > > a cool occassion for niche products or technologies. You dont want to
> > > > > discuss JavaFX or E4 in the tutorial timeperiod because a lot of
> > > > > people love to go to the tutorials and you dont want to loose those.
> > > > > But it might work for topics with a small audience.
> > > > >
> > > > > As Ralf Mueller indicated he wants us to suggest something other than
> > > > > an evening BoF to help the SOA people. Another option that Anne Jacko
> > > > > suggested is what EF also sometimes does is allow community members
> > > > > to have a closed session somewhere that is invitation only. Such a
> > > > > session is not in the program and has the disadvantage that you need
> > > > > to find the people to invite and its harder to get attendees.
> > > > >
> > > > > I need the people how had concerns with the original SOA Track idea
> > > > > (mainly Jonas and Achim maybe others who didnt raise their voice) to
> > > > > come up with suggestions and ideas so we find a solution that works
> > > > > for everyone.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > Christian Campo
> > > > >
> > > > > -----UrsprÃpngliche Nachricht-----
> > > > > Von: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > [mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > Im Auftrag von Martin Lippert
> > > > > Gesendet: Freitag, 27. Juli 2012 18:12
> > > > > An: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
> > > > > Betreff: Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] SOA Track
> > > > >
> > > > > Hey!
> > > > >
> > > > > I had to think about this for a while, therefore my late reply.
> > > > >
> > > > > What about opening up the time slot of the tutorials for additional
> > > > > BoF sessions (if we can arrange a few small rooms for them). Then we
> > > > > could tell them to do a BoF in that room at that time, and we can
> > > > > tell other people to signup for additional BoFs, if they want. And we
> > > > > could maybe arrange an open and transparent online board for those
> > > > > BoFs, so that people can see what BoFs are going to happen, when, and
> > > > > where.
> > > > >
> > > > > Would be kind of an "open space" slot for EclipseCon Europe, which I
> > > > > would like. We would not sponsor those sessions with free passes or
> > > > > something like that, just with a place to meet. Maybe that place
> > > > > would not even have a beamer, but a flipchart instead, which would
> > > > > underline the interactive character of those sessions (and avoid
> > > > > standard talks to slip in there...)
> > > > >
> > > > > What do you think?
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > -Martin
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 27.07.12 11:55, Campo, Christian wrote:
> > > > > > So what I am "hear" up to now is:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Some people object to the SOA track because it feels to them like
> > > > > > cheating or breaking rules
> > > > > > - The modelling symposium also breaks the same rules but with big
> > > > > > success in the past and we should think twice before stopping them
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To me rules should help us make a better conference program and
> > > > > > should guarantee that we are not unfair to people (equal opportunies
> > > > > > for everyone). If breaking rules create in OUR opinion (not just
> > > > > > mine) a better program then lets break rules.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think its pretty hard for an outsider to create a community within
> > > > > > Eclipse if he is not already using a hype topic. I remember in past
> > > > > > years we had for example a OFMP symposium (Open Financial Market
> > > > > > Platform) where the OFMP people sat together for a whole day to
> > > > > > discuss the possibility of the OFMP project proposal. (also in one
> > > > > > of the small rooms) I admit that OFMP is dead today but not because
> > > > > > of the symposium :-) but because of other reasons.
> > > > > > What I mean here is that we do these kind of exceptions sometimes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > BoFs are easy  for very popular topics (like JavaFX) but hard for
> > > > > > others. I once did a Eclipse Riena BoF (with only 3 people attending
> > > > > > (outside the Riena committer group)). Its really hard at night to
> > > > > > get people attracted to an unknown project. We also usually say that
> > > > > > there should be NO overhead projection during BoFs but people should
> > > > > > rather talk. (its not  forbidden but discouraged). That is also
> > > > > > pretty hard for introducing a new group of projects.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think our role as PC must be to help the SOA people to find as
> > > > > > many people as possible who are willing to give them a chance to
> > > > > > listen to their content. The proposed track is from a top-level
> > > > > > project with multiple projects in the track (from multiple
> > > > > > companies). And what is most important for me they are "the new kid
> > > > > > on the block". Unlike for example RT which is around for some time
> > > > > > now.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alternatives:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we could force them to do this SOA Night thing and even
> > > > > > though it was my idea really I came to the conclusion that this will
> > > > > > be "dead on arrival". They find too many people giving the time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another option is to tell them to break this into 4 submissions and
> > > > > > then decide about each of them individually. Say 2 of them are
> > > > > > accepted by us. That would already by optimistic given the fact that
> > > > > > only a small group of people are interested in SOA. It will reduce
> > > > > > the number of other talks that we can except. We give them speaker
> > > > > > passes and so on. And we probably break the sessions apart into
> > > > > > different rooms are different times. And we only have large rooms
> > > > > > really in Ludwigsburg. Even if they find their maximum audience the
> > > > > > room will be at least 1/2 empty if not 2/3 empty.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The alternative is we do a SOA symposium where the projects of the
> > > > > > SOA PMC now that it is restructured and new projects where added get
> > > > > > a chance to present themselves to interested people. On a plus side
> > > > > > we dont loose any speaker passes we still have 5 tutorial slots left
> > > > > > and we can see what will happen. I currently dont see any other PMC
> > > > > > in the same situation but if there is, lets hear them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > BTW we can still include the discussion about this talk in the
> > > > > > official telcos about the program that are starting next week. A
> > > > > > little difference is that we can accept this submission without
> > > > > > loosing other content. That is not true for the other tutorial slots
> > > > > > because there are only 5 regular slots that we can give away. (And
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > dont want to do the modeling symposia in a room for 40 people :-) )
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Still I am interesting in discussion if you have some free cycles :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Christian Campo
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -----UrsprÃpngliche Nachricht-----
> > > > > > Von: eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > [mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> > > > > > Im Auftrag von Ralph Mueller
> > > > > > Gesendet: Freitag, 27. Juli 2012 00:12
> > > > > > An: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
> > > > > > Cc: Eclipsecon Program Committee list
> > > > > > Betreff: Re: [eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee] SOA Track
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here's my point of view: Unfortunately, BoF's are the right thing to
> > > > > > dp, but they don't work ... not sure why that is. I propose to try
> > > > > > new ways.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > PS: Have not received any sponsoring money from any SOA corp :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Liebe GrÃpsse/Best Regards
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ralph Mueller
> > > > > > +49 177 449 0460
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am 25.07.2012 um 23:03 schrieb Bernd Kolb <b.kolb@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > <mailto:b.kolb@xxxxxxxxxxx>>:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > sorry for interfering here. I just wanted to point out one thing:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think/fear that the number of attendees will be significantly
> > > > > > > reduced if the modeling symposium (that's what it was called in the
> > > > > > > beginning) will be hold as some kind of BoF in the evening. That
> > > > > > > does
> > > > > > > not mean that the current format should or could not be changed. It
> > > > > > > is just something to keep in mind. I would as well distinguish
> > > > > > > between Modeling and all the rest :-) For whatever reason people are
> > > > > > > heavily attracted by all kind of modeling sessions at ECE and the
> > > > > > > symposium is/was a format were people could get an update in a very
> > > > > > > condensed form.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Just my 2 cents,
> > > > > > > Bernd
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2012/7/25 Simon Kaufmann <simon.kfm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > <mailto:simon.kfm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>:
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Indeed, the Modeling Symposium was crowded last year. I was also
> > > > > > > > wondering that there are so many (really short) talks that were not
> > > > > > > > submitted (or
> > > > > > > > accepted?) in the regular program and apparently there is a
> > > > > > > > significant audience for them. That leaves kind of a bad feeling.
> > > > > > > > On
> > > > > > > > the other hand, it is one of the best things that can happen - a
> > > > > > > > community is gathering at EclipseCon and they organise themselves,
> > > > > > > > exchanging some more or less cool stuff. And hopefully this is
> > > > > > > > attracting more and more people who are working on those topics. So
> > > > > > > > we somehow have to deal with it and facilitate this kind of
> > > > > > > > community exchange. I don't think it hurts the spirit of the
> > > > > > > > conference at all.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, from my point of view, that's exactly what the BoFs are
> > > > > > > > meant for, right? Definetly, this format (be it modeling symposium
> > > > > > > > or SOA track) is not what a tutorial is originally meant to be
> > > > > > > > like.
> > > > > > > > So I really like the fact that it's out of question to give SOA a
> > > > > > > > precious official tutorial slot. And actually this also applies to
> > > > > > > > modeling - I second Achim, it's cheating on the tutorial idea and
> > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > the session selection process of the official program.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  From looking at the PDF, my gut feeling would be that there hardly
> > > > > > > > will be competition between the SOA track and neither the BoFs nor
> > > > > > > > the tutorials.
> > > > > > > > SOA/BPM is not exactly a hype topic anymore that everybody will
> > > > > > > > attend to just because it is mainstream. Rather, it became a
> > > > > > > > specialized topic and having the typical EclipseCon audience in
> > > > > > > > mind
> > > > > > > > I would even consider 30 attendees ambitious. But I'd love to get
> > > > > > > > surprised and proven wrong in this point. I really think they
> > > > > > > > should get the chance to build up a community.
> > > > > > > > Enterprises still love this topic and there is a significant market
> > > > > > > > potential. Still, personally I prefer it to be a BoF.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Would it be an option to have something like "promoted" or
> > > > > > > > "preselected"
> > > > > > > > BoFs, i.e. guarantee SOA ("rookie") and modeling ("famous") a BoF
> > > > > > > > slot and do a little advertising for them in the program?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > So my vote: -0.5 (to indicate it's not a strong opinion - as long
> > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > they get a "spare" room).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Simon
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 2012/7/25 Achim Lörke <Achim.Loerke@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > <mailto:Achim.Loerke@xxxxxxxxx>>
> > > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > like Jonas I don't like the idea of a special treatment for talks
> > > > > > > > > disguised as tutorials. The Modeling symposium is there because of
> > > > > > > > > its history but actually this is cheating on the talk selection
> > > > > > > > > process, too.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So my vote is -1.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Let's give them enough room for an extended BOF.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Achim
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Quoting "Campo, Christian" <Christian.Campo@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:Christian.Campo@xxxxxxxxxxxx>>:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Hi Program Committee,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > here is a summary of some conversation that went on in the past
> > > > > > > > > > week between some of the SOA PMC (Marc Gille) and me and Ralph
> > > > > > > > > > and Anne.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > If you look at the submission
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.eclipsecon.org/europe2012/sessions/soa-track-mutiple-se
> > > > > > > > > > s sions it has only a small abstract but a pretty long PDF
> > > > > > > > > > attached to it.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Its submitted as a tutorial but only because as a tutorial
> > > > > > > > > > because
> > > > > > > > > > that has the length that the SOA people like to have. They had
> > > > > > > > > > some early conversation with Mike and Ralph that led to this
> > > > > > > > > > submission.
> > > > > > > > > > They also sent an email to Ralph and myself once the submission
> > > > > > > > > > was in.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Given that we have a total of 13 tutorial submissions and 5 slots
> > > > > > > > > > I saw little chance that this will get anywhere given that its
> > > > > > > > > > not
> > > > > > > > > > even a tutorial and tutorial are pretty popular. I asked Anne if
> > > > > > > > > > there is small room somewhere that we could give them in parallel
> > > > > > > > > > to the tutorials. We have the Seminarrooms (in the basement),
> > > > > > > > > > both
> > > > > > > > > > of them, which are not taken during the tutorials. I also suggest
> > > > > > > > > > to them (as a alternative) to do a "SOA night" in parallel to
> > > > > > > > > > the BoFs where they could have 3 or 4 hours in one of the rooms.
> > > > > > > > > > At the same time I asked to estimate the number of people coming.
> > > > > > > > > > Their goal is to get 30 people to call it a success which is not
> > > > > > > > > > that much given the 600 attendee for the conference that we are
> > > > > > > > > > aiming at (hopefully we get there).
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > After these choices the SOA PMC decided that they would call off
> > > > > > > > > > the tutorial and their favorite choice would be to have a small
> > > > > > > > > > room in parallel to the tutorial. People who choose to the SOA
> > > > > > > > > > track would not be able to attend the tutorials (they are aware
> > > > > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > > this). We would put the SOA sessions as regular submissions into
> > > > > > > > > > the system (4 sessions) after the 31st of July and add a SOA
> > > > > > > > > > track
> > > > > > > > > > to the program. They don't get speaker passes for this SOA track
> > > > > > > > > > and need to do some marketing to get people interested. Everyone
> > > > > > > > > > can attend the SOA track (its not a closed session but open to
> > > > > > > > > > everyone)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > So here is an action item for everyone in the PC. Are we all ok
> > > > > > > > > > with this ? Anyone fears that it would distract people from the
> > > > > > > > > > tutorials ? Anyone feels that we shouldn't have this kind of
> > > > > > > > > > special content ? Strong feeling pro or con ? Questions ?
> > > > > > > > > > Anything clear ?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Please vote +1 and -1 (and 0 if you must :) ). Raise concerns.
> > > > > > > > > > Now
> > > > > > > > > > is a good time.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > > > > Christian Campo
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > > compeople AG
> > > > > > > > > > Untermainanlage 8
> > > > > > > > > > 60329 Frankfurt/Main
> > > > > > > > > > fon: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 0
> > > > > > > > > > fax: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 22
> > > > > > > > > > web: www.compeople.de
> > > > > > > > > > <http://www.compeople.de><http://www.compeople.de/>
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Vorstand: J?rgen Wiesmaier
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Christian Glanz
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt/Main Handelsregister Frankfurt
> > > > > > > > > > HRB
> > > > > > > > > > 56759 USt-IdNr. DE207665352
> > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > > > BREDEX GmbH
> > > > > > > > > Mauernstr. 33
> > > > > > > > > 38100 Braunschweig
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Tel.: +49-531-24330-0
> > > > > > > > > Fax:  +49-531-24330-99
> > > > > > > > > http: www.bredex.de <http://www.bredex.de>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > GeschäftsfÃphrer: Hans-J. Brede, Achim Lörke, Ulrich Obst
> > > > > > > > > Amtsgericht Braunschweig HRB 2450
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-pro
> > > > > > > > > g
> > > > > > > > > ram-committee
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-prog
> > > > > > > > r
> > > > > > > > am-committee
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-progr
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > m-committee
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-progra
> > > > > > m-committee
> > > > > >
> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > compeople AG
> > > > > > Untermainanlage 8
> > > > > > 60329 Frankfurt/Main
> > > > > > fon: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 0
> > > > > > fax: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 22
> > > > > > web: http://www.compeople.de/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vorstand: JÃprgen Wiesmaier
> > > > > > Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Christian Glanz
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt/Main
> > > > > > Handelsregister Frankfurt HRB 56759
> > > > > > USt-IdNr. DE207665352
> > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-progra
> > > > > > m-committee
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program
> > > > > -committee
> > > > >
> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > compeople AG
> > > > > Untermainanlage 8
> > > > > 60329 Frankfurt/Main
> > > > > fon: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 0
> > > > > fax: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 22
> > > > > web: http://www.compeople.de/
> > > > >
> > > > > Vorstand: JÃprgen Wiesmaier
> > > > > Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Christian Glanz
> > > > >
> > > > > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt/Main
> > > > > Handelsregister Frankfurt HRB 56759
> > > > > USt-IdNr. DE207665352
> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > >
> > > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program
> > > > > -committee
> > > >
> > > > --------------------------------------------------------
> > > > BREDEX GmbH
> > > > Mauernstr. 33
> > > > 38100 Braunschweig
> > > >
> > > > Tel.: +49-531-24330-0
> > > > Fax:  +49-531-24330-99
> > > > http: www.bredex.de <http://www.bredex.de>
> > > >
> > > > Geschäftsführer: Hans-J. Brede, Achim Lörke, Ulrich Obst
> > > > Amtsgericht Braunschweig HRB 2450
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > > > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > <mailto:eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-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-c
> > > ommittee
> > _______________________________________________
> > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> > eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-co
> > mmittee
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> compeople AG
> Untermainanlage 8
> 60329 Frankfurt/Main
> fon: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 0
> fax: +49 (0) 69 / 27 22 18 22
> web: http://www.compeople.de/
>
> Vorstand: Jürgen Wiesmaier
> Aufsichtsratsvorsitzender: Christian Glanz
>
> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Frankfurt/Main
> Handelsregister Frankfurt HRB 56759
> USt-IdNr. DE207665352
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee mailing list
> eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/eclipse.org-eclipsecon-program-committee

--
Dr. Jonas Helming

Software Engineer / Consultant / General Manager
EclipseSource Munich

Email: jhelming@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Web: http://eclipsesource.com/munich
Phone: +49 89 21 555 301
Fax: +49 89 21 555 302
Mobile: +49 1703151698

EclipseSource München GmbH
Agnes-Pockels-Bogen 1
80992 München

General Managers: Dr. Jonas Helming, Dr. Maximilian Kögel
Registered Office: Sailerstraße 5, 80809 München, Commercial Register
München, HRB 191789