You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@community.apache.org by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> on 2015/02/19 15:05:58 UTC
ApacheCon Schedule
For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too
early caused significant logistical problems last two times (people
thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making travel plans
accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
For those involved in the process so far:
It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
Problems that I think still need solving:
* We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
awesome.
* We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks.
(LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track
on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can put together a
complete track (6 talks).
* We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in
some empties.
* We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a
very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into
crafting talk abstracts.
If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be
delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Nick Burch <ni...@apache.org>.
On Fri, 20 Feb 2015, jan i wrote:
>> If we still have that community slot, and/or one appears with at least 2
>> weeks notice...
>>
> Ross has promised to fill it with a talk not in CFP.
Great if so!
>> Currently, we have a "traditional" Apache Way talk in the schedule. There
>> has been some debate about the format of a newer one. As long as someone
>> else is willing to help out, I'd be willing to re-title the current one as
>> "The Apache Way - The Theory", then work to put together a second one "The
>> Apache Way - The Practice", covering the topics from that earlier discussion
>
> This could be quite interesting, I would like to be one of those asking
> questions in the second part :-)
OK, let's say I'll do it with help from others if another slot opens up
in the community track (cancellation etc). If not, I'll host a barcamp
session in Austin, where we can all collaborate on fleshing out Ross's
ideas, which can be used as the basis for an "Apache Way - The Practice"
talk for Europe 2015!
Nick
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 20 February 2015 at 17:14, Nick Burch <ni...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>> awesome.
>>
>
> If we still have that community slot, and/or one appears with at least 2
> weeks notice...
>
Ross has promised to fill it with a talk not in CFP.
>
> Currently, we have a "traditional" Apache Way talk in the schedule. There
> has been some debate about the format of a newer one. As long as someone
> else is willing to help out, I'd be willing to re-title the current one as
> "The Apache Way - The Theory", then work to put together a second one "The
> Apache Way - The Practice", covering the topics from that earlier discussion
>
This could be quite interesting, I would like to be one of those asking
questions in the second part :-)
rgds
jan i.
>
> (If someone else wants to just go ahead and do that, great, I'm off the
> hook! But otherwise I'm willing to help lead and deliver most of that talk
> if we need it)
>
> Nick
>
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
The community track is now full. But I do think we should slot your proposal in as a wildcard if there is space. I'm happy to help.
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Nick Burch<ma...@apache.org>
Sent: 2/20/2015 8:15 AM
To: dev<ma...@community.apache.org>
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Rich Bowen wrote:
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
If we still have that community slot, and/or one appears with at least 2
weeks notice...
Currently, we have a "traditional" Apache Way talk in the schedule. There
has been some debate about the format of a newer one. As long as someone
else is willing to help out, I'd be willing to re-title the current one as
"The Apache Way - The Theory", then work to put together a second one "The
Apache Way - The Practice", covering the topics from that earlier
discussion
(If someone else wants to just go ahead and do that, great, I'm off the
hook! But otherwise I'm willing to help lead and deliver most of that talk
if we need it)
Nick
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Nick Burch <ni...@apache.org>.
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015, Rich Bowen wrote:
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
If we still have that community slot, and/or one appears with at least 2
weeks notice...
Currently, we have a "traditional" Apache Way talk in the schedule. There
has been some debate about the format of a newer one. As long as someone
else is willing to help out, I'd be willing to re-title the current one as
"The Apache Way - The Theory", then work to put together a second one "The
Apache Way - The Practice", covering the topics from that earlier
discussion
(If someone else wants to just go ahead and do that, great, I'm off the
hook! But otherwise I'm willing to help lead and deliver most of that talk
if we need it)
Nick
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
Rich,
ARGH, I missed that, only saw the draft.
Thanks a bunch,
Hadrian
On 02/19/2015 10:35 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> You have already been invited to the document. Look at your
> drive.google.com list of docs for something matching 'MASTER'
>
> On 02/19/2015 10:17 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>> Rich, how can I get access to the list of submitted talks?
>>
>> Hadrian
>>
>> On 02/19/2015 09:05 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
>>> patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public
>>> too early caused significant logistical problems last two times
>>> (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making
>>> travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this
>>> time around.
>>>
>>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>>
>>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
>>> got 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right
>>> volume.
>>>
>>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
>>> one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>>
>>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>>
>>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community
>>> is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks
>>> to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>>> awesome.
>>>
>>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need
>>> to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry,
>>> these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming
>>> weeks. (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put
>>> together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an
>>> entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can
>>> put together a complete track (6 talks).
>>>
>>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted
>>> talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to
>>> fill in some empties.
>>>
>>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
>>> we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never
>>> have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this
>>> time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come,
>>> and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and
>>> effort into crafting talk abstracts.
>>>
>>>
>>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in
>>> touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>>
>>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
>>> can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
>>> Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be
>>> delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>>
>>
>
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
You have already been invited to the document. Look at your
drive.google.com list of docs for something matching 'MASTER'
On 02/19/2015 10:17 AM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
> Rich, how can I get access to the list of submitted talks?
>
> Hadrian
>
> On 02/19/2015 09:05 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
>> patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public
>> too early caused significant logistical problems last two times
>> (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making
>> travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this
>> time around.
>>
>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>
>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
>> got 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right
>> volume.
>>
>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
>> one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>
>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>
>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community
>> is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks
>> to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>> awesome.
>>
>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need
>> to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry,
>> these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming
>> weeks. (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put
>> together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an
>> entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can
>> put together a complete track (6 talks).
>>
>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted
>> talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to
>> fill in some empties.
>>
>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
>> we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never
>> have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this
>> time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come,
>> and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and
>> effort into crafting talk abstracts.
>>
>>
>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in
>> touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>
>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
>> can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
>> Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be
>> delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
Rich, how can I get access to the list of submitted talks?
Hadrian
On 02/19/2015 09:05 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
> patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public
> too early caused significant logistical problems last two times
> (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making
> travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this
> time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
> got 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right
> volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
> one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community
> is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks
> to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need
> to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry,
> these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming
> weeks. (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put
> together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an
> entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can
> put together a complete track (6 talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted
> talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to
> fill in some empties.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
> we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never
> have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this
> time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come,
> and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and
> effort into crafting talk abstracts.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in
> touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
> can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
> Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be
> delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
Ha! You got me on that one. You are right my talks are cloud, I was avoiding evaluating my own talks in the interests of impartiality. Doh!
Actually the one I really want to give fits well in the DevOps track I just proposed so I'll add it there for everyone's consideration (enjoy your travels)
Ross
-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbowen@rcbowen.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 7:37 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
On 02/19/2015 09:12 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we previously discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair, I'll send under separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one there are a couple I can point to that I like.
>
> Regarding your open slots I have a 5 session DevOps track already prepared. I'll send that separately too. I can easily solicit a sixth session if you want.
Thanks. I'll have a look on Friday. Gotta go get on a plane now.
>
> Regarding the likely influx of "why wasn't my talk selected" you can
> expect one from me ;-)
Looks like all your talks are in the Cloud area. I'd talk to the Cloud track chair if I were you. ;-)
>
> Ross
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbowen@rcbowen.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 6:06 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early caused significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
> 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be awesome.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks.
> (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6 talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some empties.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239 submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting talk abstracts.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 02/19/2015 09:12 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we previously discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair, I'll send under separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one there are a couple I can point to that I like.
>
> Regarding your open slots I have a 5 session DevOps track already prepared. I'll send that separately too. I can easily solicit a sixth session if you want.
Thanks. I'll have a look on Friday. Gotta go get on a plane now.
>
> Regarding the likely influx of "why wasn't my talk selected" you can expect one from me ;-)
Looks like all your talks are in the Cloud area. I'd talk to the Cloud
track chair if I were you. ;-)
>
> Ross
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbowen@rcbowen.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 6:06 AM
> To: dev
> Subject: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early caused significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
> 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be awesome.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks.
> (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6 talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some empties.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239 submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting talk abstracts.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Suresh Marru <sm...@apache.org>.
On Feb 24, 2015, at 4:00 PM, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> On 02/24/2015 03:44 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> Just a quick FYI: It looks like the acceptance emails are
>> going out but it does not mention which talk(s) was
>> accepted. Kinda hard if you've submitted several talks. :)
I have the same question as I am in the same situation (as probably many others on this list).
>>
>
> Which leads to a very important question: What was the reply-to set to on that? (Hopefully not me!)
Reply to is set to ccr at linuxfoundation.org <http://linuxfoundation.org/>, so you are spared by Craig Ross :)
Suresh
>
> --Rich
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 02/24/2015 03:44 PM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> Just a quick FYI: It looks like the acceptance emails are
> going out but it does not mention which talk(s) was
> accepted. Kinda hard if you've submitted several talks. :)
>
Which leads to a very important question: What was the reply-to set to
on that? (Hopefully not me!)
--Rich
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
Just a quick FYI: It looks like the acceptance emails are
going out but it does not mention which talk(s) was
accepted. Kinda hard if you've submitted several talks. :)
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
Here's the TEALS abstract for Joe's community track. As previously discussed this is not a "usual" ApacheCon session so I would like to work with LF to promote this important session a little. I'll wait until the programme is published before starting to think about that though.
Title:
Volunteer to Teach High School CS Without Quitting Your Day Job
Talk Abstract:
How do we solve the problem of shortage software engineers and lack of CS courses in American high schools? Roll up your sleeves and do something about it! Come and learn how you can help solve this problem.
TEALS (Technology Education And Literacy in Schools) is a grassroots program that recruits, trains, mentors, and places high tech professionals from across the country who are passionate about computer science education into high school classes as volunteer teachers in a team teaching model where the school district is unable to meet their students’ CS needs on its own. TEALS works with committed partner schools and classroom teachers to eventually hand off the CS courses to the classroom teachers. The school will then be able to maintain and grow a sustainable CS program on their own.
Speaker Bio:
Kevin Wang, Founder & Ringleader
Kevin has an undergrad in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from UC Berkeley and a graduate degree in Education from Harvard University. He built and taught a 7-12 Computer Science curriculum for three years at a San Francisco Bay Area high school and additional years part time at a local Seattle area school, robotics summer camp, after school at the Community Charter School of Cambridge, and online at UMass Boston. He was a member of the MIT Teacher Education Program’s StarLogo programming language team, where he published a paper on kids programming games using a block programming language. Kevin was also an engineering fellow specializing in knowledge transfer at Lockheed Martin and Toyota. Kevin was a software engineer in the Microsoft Office 365 group when he founded TEALS in 2009. Kevin spends what little of his free time trying to not be outsmarted by his Shetland sheepdog while watching British panel quiz shows.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:51 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: RE: ApacheCon Schedule
I can't comment on the time (I haven't put anything on the spreadsheet). I am awaiting an abstract & title. I'll ping them right now. If nothing here by Sunday I'll write something myself.
Ross
-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbowen@rcbowen.com]
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:45 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
So, do I understand that we're scheduling a TEALS talk in the 4pm slot on Monday, and you will provide a title and abstract soonish?
I'm putting that in the grid now. LF says they'll get to actual scheduling Monday, so we need that by Sunday if possible. Thanks.
On 02/19/2015 03:54 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> Yep, I'll get it ASAP and share here.
>
> Ross
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:jzb@zonker.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 3:48 PM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>> I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we
>> previously discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair,
>> I'll send under separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one
>> there are a couple I can point to that I like.
>
> Yeah, I like that session idea. Will you get an abstract/bio from your contact with TEALS? +1 from me.
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
I can't comment on the time (I haven't put anything on the spreadsheet). I am awaiting an abstract & title. I'll ping them right now. If nothing here by Sunday I'll write something myself.
Ross
-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbowen@rcbowen.com]
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2015 12:45 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
So, do I understand that we're scheduling a TEALS talk in the 4pm slot on Monday, and you will provide a title and abstract soonish?
I'm putting that in the grid now. LF says they'll get to actual scheduling Monday, so we need that by Sunday if possible. Thanks.
On 02/19/2015 03:54 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> Yep, I'll get it ASAP and share here.
>
> Ross
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:jzb@zonker.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 3:48 PM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>> I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we
>> previously discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair,
>> I'll send under separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one
>> there are a couple I can point to that I like.
>
> Yeah, I like that session idea. Will you get an abstract/bio from your contact with TEALS? +1 from me.
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
So, do I understand that we're scheduling a TEALS talk in the 4pm slot
on Monday, and you will provide a title and abstract soonish?
I'm putting that in the grid now. LF says they'll get to actual
scheduling Monday, so we need that by Sunday if possible. Thanks.
On 02/19/2015 03:54 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> Yep, I'll get it ASAP and share here.
>
> Ross
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:jzb@zonker.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 3:48 PM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>> I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we
>> previously discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair,
>> I'll send under separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one
>> there are a couple I can point to that I like.
>
> Yeah, I like that session idea. Will you get an abstract/bio from your contact with TEALS? +1 from me.
>
> Best,
>
> jzb
> --
> Joe Brockmeier
> jzb@zonker.net
> Twitter: @jzb
> http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
Yep, I'll get it ASAP and share here.
Ross
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Brockmeier [mailto:jzb@zonker.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 3:48 PM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we
> previously discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair,
> I'll send under separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one
> there are a couple I can point to that I like.
Yeah, I like that session idea. Will you get an abstract/bio from your contact with TEALS? +1 from me.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Joe Brockmeier <jz...@zonker.net>.
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015, at 08:12 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we previously
> discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair, I'll send under
> separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one there are a couple I
> can point to that I like.
Yeah, I like that session idea. Will you get an abstract/bio from your
contact with TEALS? +1 from me.
Best,
jzb
--
Joe Brockmeier
jzb@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
I can fill that community track with the TEALS session that we previously discussed. I owe details of that to Joe as track chair, I'll send under separate cover shortly. If we don't want that one there are a couple I can point to that I like.
Regarding your open slots I have a 5 session DevOps track already prepared. I'll send that separately too. I can easily solicit a sixth session if you want.
Regarding the likely influx of "why wasn't my talk selected" you can expect one from me ;-)
Ross
-----Original Message-----
From: Rich Bowen [mailto:rbowen@rcbowen.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 6:06 AM
To: dev
Subject: ApacheCon Schedule
For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early caused significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
For those involved in the process so far:
It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
Problems that I think still need solving:
* We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be awesome.
* We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks.
(LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6 talks).
* We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some empties.
* We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239 submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting talk abstracts.
If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 19 February 2015 at 16:39, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) <
Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com> wrote:
> Re pushing out to PMCs. Historically this has not been a good idea. Once
> you have 200+ PMCs and PPMCs fighting over 200+ slots you get a horribly
> disjointed program with no real value.
>
> This is one reason why I want LF to set the theme. We can then create a
> smaller list of PMCs that fit the theme.
>
Which is going to happen for next AC. That is actually part of what I want
by having track-chair very early in the process....and they will then push
the requiered PMCs for talks.
rgds
jan I.
>
> My as yet unspoken hope is that we will then end up with multiple
> ApacheCons each year, something like "ApacheCon: Big Data", "ApacheCon:
> Applications", "ApacheCon: Cloud". However we need to give LF time to walk
> before we ask them to consider running (I believe that time has now passed
> and will make this suggestion in Austin when we debrief.
>
> Rss
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: jan i [mailto:jani@apache.org]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 7:29 AM
> To: dev@community.apache.org
> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>
> > For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
> > patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public
> > too early caused significant logistical problems last two times
> > (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making
> > travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this time
> around.
> >
> > For those involved in the process so far:
> >
> > It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
> > got 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right
> volume.
> >
> > Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
> > one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
> >
> > Problems that I think still need solving:
> >
> > * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community
> > is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks
> > to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> > not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> > awesome.
> >
> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>
> >
> > * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need
> > to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry,
> > these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming
> > weeks. (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put
> > together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an
> > entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can
> > put together a complete track (6 talks).
> >
> > * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted
> > talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to
> > fill in some empties.
> >
> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course)
> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>
>
> >
> > * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> > submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
> > we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never
> > have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this
> > time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come,
> > and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and
> > effort into crafting talk abstracts.
> >
> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have
> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
> create the right talks.
>
> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>
>
> >
> >
> > If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in
> > touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
> >
> > Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> > Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
> > can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
> > Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be
> > delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
> >
> thats me :-)
>
> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as
> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
>
> rgds
> jan i
>
>
> > --
> > Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ -
> > @apachecon
> >
>
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
Re pushing out to PMCs. Historically this has not been a good idea. Once you have 200+ PMCs and PPMCs fighting over 200+ slots you get a horribly disjointed program with no real value.
This is one reason why I want LF to set the theme. We can then create a smaller list of PMCs that fit the theme.
My as yet unspoken hope is that we will then end up with multiple ApacheCons each year, something like "ApacheCon: Big Data", "ApacheCon: Applications", "ApacheCon: Cloud". However we need to give LF time to walk before we ask them to consider running (I believe that time has now passed and will make this suggestion in Austin when we debrief.
Rss
-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [mailto:jani@apache.org]
Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2015 7:29 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
> patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public
> too early caused significant logistical problems last two times
> (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making
> travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
> got 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
> one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community
> is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks
> to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
>
I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need
> to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry,
> these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming
> weeks. (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put
> together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an
> entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can
> put together a complete track (6 talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted
> talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to
> fill in some empties.
>
I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course) and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
> we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never
> have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this
> time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will come,
> and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and
> effort into crafting talk abstracts.
>
This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help create the right talks.
I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in
> touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
> can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
> Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be
> delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
thats me :-)
I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
rgds
jan i
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen http://apachecon.com/ -
> @apachecon
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 19 February 2015 at 17:05, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) <
Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com> wrote:
> I just added 4 sessions. There is one more for the community track if Joe
> wants it (not in CFP). So there is space for a 6 session track from Hadrian.
>
Thanks. If you have the time, and joe wants the talk (I assume you
coordinate directly), then please send me a mail with information as per
columns in the spreadsheet, then I will get it added to CFP.
rgds
jan i.
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: jan i<ma...@apache.org>
> Sent: 2/19/2015 7:59 AM
> To: dev@community.apache.org<ma...@community.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> On 19 February 2015 at 16:49, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
> > run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
> >
> I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put together a 6
> > talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get on it
> > and have it done probably before the end of the day.
> >
>
> Rich is boarding his plane now, but I am fine with such a track...but
> please coordinate the number of free spaces with Ross, so we avoid double
> bookings.
>
> rgds
> jan i
>
>
> >
> > Cheers
> > Hadrian
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
> >
> >> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
> patience,
> >>> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early
> >>> caused
> >>> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they
> knew
> >>> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and
> >>> we
> >>> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
> >>>
> >>> For those involved in the process so far:
> >>>
> >>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
> got
> >>> 7
> >>> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
> >>>
> >>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
> >>> one,
> >>> think we have a kickin' schedule.
> >>>
> >>> Problems that I think still need solving:
> >>>
> >>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
> >>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
> >>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> >>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> >>> awesome.
> >>>
> >>> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
> >>
> >> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
> >>> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
> >>> will
> >>> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
> >>> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
> >>> half-day
> >>> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on
> >>> Wednesday,
> >>> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
> >>> talks).
> >>>
> >>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
> >>> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in
> some
> >>> empties.
> >>>
> >>> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
> >> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of
> course)
> >> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
> >>
> >>
> >> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> >>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
> we'll
> >>> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have
> very
> >>> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
> >>> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a
> very
> >>> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into
> crafting
> >>> talk abstracts.
> >>>
> >>> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and
> have
> >> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
> >> create the right talks.
> >>
> >> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
> >> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
> >>> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
> >>>
> >>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> >>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
> can
> >>> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
> Owner
> >>> of
> >>> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
> >>> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
> >>>
> >>> thats me :-)
> >>
> >> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC
> as
> >> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
> >>
> >> rgds
> >> jan i
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> >>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
> >>>
> >>>
> >
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 19 February 2015 at 22:55, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I reviewed all 239 proposals and selected the following (most interesting
> first):
>
> #85
> #145
> #201
> #188
> #58
> #155
>
I have changed the above 6 talks to ACCEPTED and track: integration in
MASTER
I have to wait on Rich get copy them into the schedule (after his
presentation sometime today).
rgds
jan
> #237 - speaker has another accepted talk
>
>
> Interesting, but:
> #39 - bordering the big-data side
> #64 - sounds more suitable for a business track
> #13 - already a few other kafka presentations
> #202 - less focused than #201
> #106 - #155 is more interesting
> #138 - #155 is more interesting
> #236 - less interesting than #237 (and #238 accepted)
>
> Notes:
> * I would have put #237 higher up, but speaker already has #238 accepted.
> * I selected 7 in the first section; (at least) one will end up on the
> waiting list
> * there are a few kafka presentations I ignored, already a few accepted
> ones
> * #35 sounds very interesting, but doesn't belong to this track
>
> Please review and decide. Feel free to change or reshuffle as necessary.
>
> Cheers,
> Hadrian
>
>
>
>
> On 02/19/2015 11:05 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>
>> I just added 4 sessions. There is one more for the community track if Joe
>> wants it (not in CFP). So there is space for a 6 session track from Hadrian.
>>
>> Sent from my Windows Phone
>> ________________________________
>> From: jan i<ma...@apache.org>
>> Sent: 2/19/2015 7:59 AM
>> To: dev@community.apache.org<ma...@community.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>>
>> On 19 February 2015 at 16:49, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
>>> run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
>>>
>>> I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put together
>> a 6
>>
>>> talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get on it
>>> and have it done probably before the end of the day.
>>>
>>> Rich is boarding his plane now, but I am fine with such a track...but
>> please coordinate the number of free spaces with Ross, so we avoid double
>> bookings.
>>
>> rgds
>> jan i
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
>>>> patience,
>>>>
>>>>> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early
>>>>> caused
>>>>> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they
>>>>> knew
>>>>> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and
>>>>> we
>>>>> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>>>>>
>>>>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
>>>>> got
>>>>> 7
>>>>> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
>>>>> one,
>>>>> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>>>>
>>>>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>>>>
>>>>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
>>>>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
>>>>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>>>>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>>>>> awesome.
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>>>>>
>>>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need
>>>> to
>>>>
>>>>> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
>>>>> will
>>>>> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
>>>>> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
>>>>> half-day
>>>>> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on
>>>>> Wednesday,
>>>>> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
>>>>> talks).
>>>>>
>>>>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
>>>>> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in
>>>>> some
>>>>> empties.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
>>>>>
>>>> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of
>>>> course)
>>>> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>>>>
>>>>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
>>>>> we'll
>>>>> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have
>>>>> very
>>>>> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
>>>>> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a
>>>>> very
>>>>> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into
>>>>> crafting
>>>>> talk abstracts.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and
>>>>> have
>>>>>
>>>> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
>>>> create the right talks.
>>>>
>>>> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
>>>> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
>>>>> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>>>>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
>>>>> can
>>>>> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
>>>>> Owner
>>>>> of
>>>>> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
>>>>> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> thats me :-)
>>>>>
>>>> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC
>>>> as
>>>> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
>>>>
>>>> rgds
>>>> jan i
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule - Integration
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Rich,
#237 is a 7th talk (sort of a waiting list for precisely the reason you
mention). We can go further down the list, my list was longer than that.
Cheers,
Hadrian
On 02/20/2015 04:14 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>
> On 02/19/2015 01:55 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>>
>> #85
>> #145
>> #201
>> #188
>> #58
>> #155
>> #237 - speaker has another accepted talk
>
>
> Ok, I've scheduled these. Could be that we'll just not fill a few
> slots when people decline their acceptance, and we'll be fine.
>
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule - Integration
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 02/19/2015 01:55 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
>
> #85
> #145
> #201
> #188
> #58
> #155
> #237 - speaker has another accepted talk
Ok, I've scheduled these. Could be that we'll just not fill a few slots
when people decline their acceptance, and we'll be fine.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
I'm a little confused as to what this email represents. Is this the
"integration" track? Is it two days of content, or is it one, with ...
fallbacks?
On 02/19/2015 01:55 PM, Hadrian Zbarcea wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I reviewed all 239 proposals and selected the following (most
> interesting first):
>
> #85
> #145
> #201
> #188
> #58
> #155
> #237 - speaker has another accepted talk
>
>
> Interesting, but:
> #39 - bordering the big-data side
> #64 - sounds more suitable for a business track
> #13 - already a few other kafka presentations
> #202 - less focused than #201
> #106 - #155 is more interesting
> #138 - #155 is more interesting
> #236 - less interesting than #237 (and #238 accepted)
>
> Notes:
> * I would have put #237 higher up, but speaker already has #238 accepted.
> * I selected 7 in the first section; (at least) one will end up on the
> waiting list
> * there are a few kafka presentations I ignored, already a few accepted
> ones
> * #35 sounds very interesting, but doesn't belong to this track
>
> Please review and decide. Feel free to change or reshuffle as necessary.
>
> Cheers,
> Hadrian
>
>
>
> On 02/19/2015 11:05 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
>> I just added 4 sessions. There is one more for the community track if
>> Joe wants it (not in CFP). So there is space for a 6 session track
>> from Hadrian.
>>
>> Sent from my Windows Phone
>> ________________________________
>> From: jan i<ma...@apache.org>
>> Sent: 2/19/2015 7:59 AM
>> To: dev@community.apache.org<ma...@community.apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>>
>> On 19 February 2015 at 16:49, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
>>> run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
>>>
>> I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put
>> together a 6
>>> talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get on it
>>> and have it done probably before the end of the day.
>>>
>> Rich is boarding his plane now, but I am fine with such a track...but
>> please coordinate the number of free spaces with Ross, so we avoid double
>> bookings.
>>
>> rgds
>> jan i
>>
>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Hadrian
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
>>>> patience,
>>>>> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early
>>>>> caused
>>>>> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking
>>>>> they knew
>>>>> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly),
>>>>> and
>>>>> we
>>>>> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>>>>>
>>>>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>>>>
>>>>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of.
>>>>> We've got
>>>>> 7
>>>>> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
>>>>> one,
>>>>> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>>>>
>>>>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>>>>
>>>>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that
>>>>> community is
>>>>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
>>>>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>>>>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>>>>> awesome.
>>>>>
>>>>> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>>>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we
>>>> need to
>>>>> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
>>>>> will
>>>>> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks.
>>>>> (LF's
>>>>> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
>>>>> half-day
>>>>> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on
>>>>> Wednesday,
>>>>> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
>>>>> talks).
>>>>>
>>>>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted
>>>>> talks,
>>>>> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill
>>>>> in some
>>>>> empties.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
>>>> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of
>>>> course)
>>>> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>>>>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
>>>>> we'll
>>>>> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have
>>>>> very
>>>>> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too
>>>>> much
>>>>> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's
>>>>> a very
>>>>> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into
>>>>> crafting
>>>>> talk abstracts.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs
>>>>> and have
>>>> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
>>>> create the right talks.
>>>>
>>>> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
>>>> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in
>>>>> touch
>>>>> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>>>>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen,
>>>>> who can
>>>>> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
>>>>> Owner
>>>>> of
>>>>> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
>>>>> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>>>>
>>>>> thats me :-)
>>>> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on
>>>> IRC as
>>>> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
>>>>
>>>> rgds
>>>> jan i
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I reviewed all 239 proposals and selected the following (most
interesting first):
#85
#145
#201
#188
#58
#155
#237 - speaker has another accepted talk
Interesting, but:
#39 - bordering the big-data side
#64 - sounds more suitable for a business track
#13 - already a few other kafka presentations
#202 - less focused than #201
#106 - #155 is more interesting
#138 - #155 is more interesting
#236 - less interesting than #237 (and #238 accepted)
Notes:
* I would have put #237 higher up, but speaker already has #238 accepted.
* I selected 7 in the first section; (at least) one will end up on the
waiting list
* there are a few kafka presentations I ignored, already a few accepted ones
* #35 sounds very interesting, but doesn't belong to this track
Please review and decide. Feel free to change or reshuffle as necessary.
Cheers,
Hadrian
On 02/19/2015 11:05 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote:
> I just added 4 sessions. There is one more for the community track if Joe wants it (not in CFP). So there is space for a 6 session track from Hadrian.
>
> Sent from my Windows Phone
> ________________________________
> From: jan i<ma...@apache.org>
> Sent: 2/19/2015 7:59 AM
> To: dev@community.apache.org<ma...@community.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
>
> On 19 February 2015 at 16:49, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
>> run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
>>
> I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put together a 6
>> talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get on it
>> and have it done probably before the end of the day.
>>
> Rich is boarding his plane now, but I am fine with such a track...but
> please coordinate the number of free spaces with Ross, so we avoid double
> bookings.
>
> rgds
> jan i
>
>
>> Cheers
>> Hadrian
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
>>
>>> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience,
>>>> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early
>>>> caused
>>>> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew
>>>> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and
>>>> we
>>>> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>>>>
>>>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>>>
>>>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
>>>> 7
>>>> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>>>>
>>>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
>>>> one,
>>>> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>>>
>>>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>>>
>>>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
>>>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
>>>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>>>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>>>> awesome.
>>>>
>>>> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
>>>> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
>>>> will
>>>> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
>>>> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
>>>> half-day
>>>> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on
>>>> Wednesday,
>>>> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
>>>> talks).
>>>>
>>>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
>>>> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some
>>>> empties.
>>>>
>>>> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
>>> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course)
>>> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>>>
>>>
>>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>>>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
>>>> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
>>>> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
>>>> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very
>>>> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting
>>>> talk abstracts.
>>>>
>>>> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have
>>> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
>>> create the right talks.
>>>
>>> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
>>> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
>>>> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>>>
>>>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>>>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can
>>>> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner
>>>> of
>>>> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
>>>> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>>>
>>>> thats me :-)
>>> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as
>>> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
>>>
>>> rgds
>>> jan i
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>>
>>>>
RE: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ro...@microsoft.com>.
I just added 4 sessions. There is one more for the community track if Joe wants it (not in CFP). So there is space for a 6 session track from Hadrian.
Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: jan i<ma...@apache.org>
Sent: 2/19/2015 7:59 AM
To: dev@community.apache.org<ma...@community.apache.org>
Subject: Re: ApacheCon Schedule
On 19 February 2015 at 16:49, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
> run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
>
I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put together a 6
> talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get on it
> and have it done probably before the end of the day.
>
Rich is boarding his plane now, but I am fine with such a track...but
please coordinate the number of free spaces with Ross, so we avoid double
bookings.
rgds
jan i
>
> Cheers
> Hadrian
>
>
>
>
> On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
>
>> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>
>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience,
>>> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early
>>> caused
>>> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew
>>> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and
>>> we
>>> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>>>
>>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>>
>>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
>>> 7
>>> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>>>
>>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
>>> one,
>>> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>>
>>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>>
>>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
>>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
>>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>>> awesome.
>>>
>>> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>>
>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
>>> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
>>> will
>>> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
>>> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
>>> half-day
>>> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on
>>> Wednesday,
>>> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
>>> talks).
>>>
>>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
>>> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some
>>> empties.
>>>
>>> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
>> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course)
>> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>>
>>
>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
>>> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
>>> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
>>> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very
>>> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting
>>> talk abstracts.
>>>
>>> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have
>> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
>> create the right talks.
>>
>> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
>> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>>
>>
>>
>>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
>>> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>>
>>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can
>>> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner
>>> of
>>> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
>>> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>>
>>> thats me :-)
>>
>> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as
>> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
>>
>> rgds
>> jan i
>>
>>
>> --
>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>
>>>
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 19 February 2015 at 16:49, Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
> run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
>
I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put together a 6
> talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get on it
> and have it done probably before the end of the day.
>
Rich is boarding his plane now, but I am fine with such a track...but
please coordinate the number of free spaces with Ross, so we avoid double
bookings.
rgds
jan i
>
> Cheers
> Hadrian
>
>
>
>
> On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
>
>> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>>
>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience,
>>> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early
>>> caused
>>> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew
>>> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and
>>> we
>>> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>>>
>>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>>
>>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
>>> 7
>>> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>>>
>>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
>>> one,
>>> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>>
>>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>>
>>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
>>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
>>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>>> awesome.
>>>
>>> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>>
>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
>>> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
>>> will
>>> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
>>> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
>>> half-day
>>> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on
>>> Wednesday,
>>> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
>>> talks).
>>>
>>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
>>> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some
>>> empties.
>>>
>>> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
>> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course)
>> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>>
>>
>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
>>> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
>>> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
>>> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very
>>> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting
>>> talk abstracts.
>>>
>>> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have
>> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
>> create the right talks.
>>
>> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
>> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>>
>>
>>
>>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
>>> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>>
>>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can
>>> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner
>>> of
>>> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
>>> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>>
>>> thats me :-)
>>
>> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as
>> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
>>
>> rgds
>> jan i
>>
>>
>> --
>>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>>
>>>
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Hadrian Zbarcea <hz...@gmail.com>.
Traditionally we had an integration track at ApacheCon. I volunteered to
run it this year, but there was virtually no answer from the PMCs.
I see however that there are more than enough proposals to put together
a 6 talks integration track for Wed. If I could get a second, I'll get
on it and have it done probably before the end of the day.
Cheers
Hadrian
On 02/19/2015 10:29 AM, jan i wrote:
> On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>
>> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience,
>> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early caused
>> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew
>> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and we
>> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>>
>> For those involved in the process so far:
>>
>> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got 7
>> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>>
>> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for one,
>> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>>
>> Problems that I think still need solving:
>>
>> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
>> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
>> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
>> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
>> awesome.
>>
> I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>
>> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
>> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these will
>> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
>> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few half-day
>> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on Wednesday,
>> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
>> talks).
>>
>> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
>> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some
>> empties.
>>
> I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
> definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course)
> and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>
>
>> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
>> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
>> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
>> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
>> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very
>> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting
>> talk abstracts.
>>
> This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have
> track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
> create the right talks.
>
> I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
> better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>
>
>>
>> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
>> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>>
>> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
>> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can
>> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner of
>> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
>> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>>
> thats me :-)
>
> I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as
> much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
>
> rgds
> jan i
>
>
>> --
>> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
>> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by jan i <ja...@apache.org>.
On 19 February 2015 at 15:05, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience,
> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early caused
> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew
> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and we
> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got 7
> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for one,
> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
>
I did not find what I thought was a really strong community talk.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these will
> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few half-day
> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on Wednesday,
> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
> talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some
> empties.
>
I am now on my second iteration, to mark talks as wait-listed. The
definition is pretty simple, it need to be an unscheduled talk (of course)
and the speaker must have an accepted talk.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very
> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting
> talk abstracts.
>
This is really a good argument for pushing more out to the PMCs and have
track chairs, who start before CFP officially opens, so they can help
create the right talks.
I take this as a lesson learned. To be fair the track-chair idea worked
better than I thought, and next time we know to push harder for that.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can
> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner of
> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
thats me :-)
I will be available the next couple of days, and try also to be on IRC as
much as possible....sadly enough sharing is left to Rich.
rgds
jan i
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Shane Curcuru <as...@shanecurcuru.org>.
Apologies if I'm too late to the party; life and snow have interfered a
lot lately.
Overall the schedule looks awesome!
My "How To Keep Your Apache Project's Independence" is really focused on
individual project participants and active PMC members, not business
types, so would fit better in the Community track if that's practical.
I don't know if it would make sense to swap with "From the Incubator to
TLP..." (which might be of interest to business types who want to bring
their company's projects to Apache) or Nick's Apache Way (which often
seems to be more important for business people to attend rather than
community types).
Note: I cannot speak first thing Monday morning.
- Shane
On 2/19/15 9:05 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
> patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too
> early caused significant logistical problems last two times (people
> thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making travel plans
> accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got
> 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for
> one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these
> will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks.
> (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few
> half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track
> on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that they can put together a
> complete track (6 talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in
> some empties.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a
> very unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into
> crafting talk abstracts.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who
> can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him
> Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be
> delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
I've invited you to the spreadsheet.
On 02/19/2015 09:24 AM, Pierre Smits wrote:
> Jan, Rich,
>
> Where can I access the schedule to check?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Pierre Smits
>
> *ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
> Services & Solutions for Cloud-
> Based Manufacturing, Professional
> Services and Retail & Trade
> http://www.orrtiz.com <http://www.orrtiz.com/>
>
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Rich Bowen <rbowen@rcbowen.com
> <ma...@rcbowen.com>> wrote:
>
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your
> patience, and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public
> too early caused significant logistical problems last two times
> (people thinking they knew things that they didn't know, and making
> travel plans accordingly), and we want to avoid that nightmare this
> time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've
> got 7 tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right
> volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I,
> for one, think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community
> is what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community
> talks to schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look
> through the not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find,
> that would be awesome.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need
> to leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry,
> these will NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the
> coming weeks. (LF's problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably
> put together a few half-day tracks if we put our minds to it. We
> have an entire day/track on Wednesday, if someone still thinks that
> they can put together a complete track (6 talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted
> talks, and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to
> fill in some empties.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So
> we'll get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never
> have very good answers to that, because the answer really is, this
> time, too much content, too little space. But the questions will
> come, and that's a very unsatisfying answer to people that have put
> time and effort into crafting talk abstracts.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in
> touch with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen,
> who can also help you out with this - although apparently I can't
> make him Owner of the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with
> you will be delayed, unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com <ma...@rcbowen.com> - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>
>
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: ApacheCon Schedule
Posted by Pierre Smits <pi...@gmail.com>.
Jan, Rich,
Where can I access the schedule to check?
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com>*
Services & Solutions for Cloud-
Based Manufacturing, Professional
Services and Retail & Trade
http://www.orrtiz.com
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> For those not involved in the process so far, I appreciate your patience,
> and your suffering in the dark. Making the schedule public too early caused
> significant logistical problems last two times (people thinking they knew
> things that they didn't know, and making travel plans accordingly), and we
> want to avoid that nightmare this time around.
>
> For those involved in the process so far:
>
> It looks like we're done with the ApacheCon schedule. Sort of. We've got 7
> tracks, three days, which I think is probably just the right volume.
>
> Please look at the DRAFT schedule, and comment in this thread. I, for one,
> think we have a kickin' schedule.
>
> Problems that I think still need solving:
>
> * We have an empty spot in the community track. Given that community is
> what we *do*, it seems that we could come up with 6 community talks to
> schedule, and have a few fallbacks. If folks could look through the
> not-yet-accepted list with me and see what you can find, that would be
> awesome.
>
> * We have 16 open slots. We don't need to fill all of them - we need to
> leave 6 or 7 slots open for vendor-sponsored talks (Don't worry, these will
> NOT be product pitches) which will show up over the coming weeks. (LF's
> problem, not ours.) But I think we can probably put together a few half-day
> tracks if we put our minds to it. We have an entire day/track on Wednesday,
> if someone still thinks that they can put together a complete track (6
> talks).
>
> * We need more wait-listed talks. We currently have 6 waitlisted talks,
> and I'm probably going to take several of those right now to fill in some
> empties.
>
> * We have the problem that's not a problem, which is that we had 239
> submissions, and have only accepted 115 talks - less than half. So we'll
> get a LOT of "why wasn't my talk accepted" emails, and I never have very
> good answers to that, because the answer really is, this time, too much
> content, too little space. But the questions will come, and that's a very
> unsatisfying answer to people that have put time and effort into crafting
> talk abstracts.
>
>
> If you would like to help with any of these things, please get in touch
> with me. Or, just step up and claim it and do it.
>
> Note that I will be flying for much of today, and at a conference
> Friday-Sunday, so if I'm not responsive, please ping Jan Iversen, who can
> also help you out with this - although apparently I can't make him Owner of
> the Google Doc, so actually sharing the doc with you will be delayed,
> unless you respond in the next 3 hours.
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>