Update on MesosCon 2016 Planning

[Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org>]

Hello Mesos Community!

About a week ago I had an email exchange with the Mesos PMC regarding the future of MesosCon, the community-driven conference for the Apache Mesos community. This is an abbreviated version of that email — I wanted to make sure we are transparent about where things stand, and give a peak at next year!

MesosCon in 2016
We’re looking at holding three MesosCon events in 2016: North America in (early) June, MesosCon Europe (date TBD), and to expand the conference internationally with MesosCon China (end of year, possibly December). The Linux Foundation will continue to handle logistics and sponsorship for these events, and we’re excited to continue our relationship with them as we grow the conference in scale and internationally. The only potential difference is that our 2016 events may be stand-alone instead of co-located with LinuxCon.

An announcement regarding the location and dates for MesosCon North American 2016 should be made in early January. We’ll keep the mailing lists up-to-date on MesosCon Europe and MesosCon China as well, and the Linux Foundation has already begun exploring locations in Europe.

Structure of MesosCon Program Committee
Following the first two MesosCon events (Chicago 2014, Seattle 2015) where I was conference chair, we shook up our organizational structure for MesosCon Europe 2015 by adopting a conference chair trio, including myself (independent), David Greenberg (Two Sigma), and Kiersten Gaffney (Mesosphere).

Why the structure of three co-chairs? To ensure there aren’t bottle-necks in the planning process, to better divide up the conference work without having too many people involved, and to ensure balanced representation and neutral participation — no one company or group will dominate the direction or organization of the conference. Final decisions are being made by the three of us.

Coming out of MesosCon Europe, we’ve continued that structure and have also included Chris Schaefer and Chris Aniszczyk in the provisional planning of 2016 conferences given their consistent participation in planning previous events. The idea is to add additional program committee members as needed and during the proposal review process, but finalize the basics before we grow our ranks — we’ll let the mailing lists know if/when we need your help!

If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, let us know! We look forward to sharing future updates, and seeing you at a MesosCon in 2016!

Dave

Re: Update on MesosCon 2016 Planning

[Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org>]

Have no fear: the spirit of MesosCon has not changed, nor has the conference's organization become less open. A key difference is that the event chair is now a set of co-chairs (a system we successfully adopted for MesosCon Europe in October). By moving beyond the previous structure where I was the benevolent dictator, we're even more open than before.

Reading between the lines a bit, I assume the concern is with the larger program committee (PC) and ambiguity of its future given the formalization of co-chairs. The PC structure is not set in stone, nor should it ever be IMO. No event is the same, and as the community continues to grow and evolve, the structure and participation should reflect the needs of the community and of the conference. To advance future conference planning with the Linux Foundation (we’re already discussing events 12-months away), the conference co-chair structure gives the stability and decision-making ability to keep the conference moving forward.

In practice, what does this mean for the future of the PC? It will still be composed of the aforementioned co-chairs, along with a set of community volunteers who will help with the program and numerous other parts of the conference organization. For context, with MesosCon Seattle we had volunteers working on the program, and a series of subcommittees including event experience (which included the conference's diversity initiative), program and keynote speaker selection, and sponsorship -- none of those things have been nailed down yet. We haven't gotten to the stage of having a call for volunteers yet for any of the 2016 events, but stay tuned!

Among other open features of the conference that I’d like to see continue: our tradition of an open review process for speaking proposals. There are no plans to change that.

Another concern that was brought up was that the conference would less-reflect the geography of the community and different companies represented. That’s not the case, and we’ve actively taken steps to avoid that. All co-chairs work for different companies, and we're committed to the conference being a vendor-neutral event. In terms of geography, for MesosCon Europe we ensured we had folks from London and Amsterdam on the PC to help us make decisions -- and we did bias talk selection toward local speakers — our goal being to encourage growth of the European Mesos community.

Does that answer your questions and concerns?

Dave

> On Dec 21, 2015, at 9:22 PM, Abhishek Parolkar <ab...@parolkar.com> wrote:
> 
> I am curious to know that as well, about the reason for this change.  We
> could benefit alot by staying open as it has been.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Arunabha Ghosh <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello Mesos Community!
>>> 
>>> About a week ago I had an email exchange with the Mesos PMC regarding the
>>> future of MesosCon, the community-driven conference for the Apache Mesos
>>> community. This is an abbreviated version of that email — I wanted to make
>>> sure we are transparent about where things stand, and give a peak at next
>>> year!
>>> 
>>> *MesosCon in 2016*
>>> We’re looking at holding three MesosCon events in 2016: North America in
>>> (early) June, MesosCon Europe (date TBD), and to expand the conference
>>> internationally with MesosCon China (end of year, possibly December). The
>>> Linux Foundation will continue to handle logistics and sponsorship for
>>> these events, and we’re excited to continue our relationship with them as
>>> we grow the conference in scale and internationally. The only potential
>>> difference is that our 2016 events may be stand-alone instead of co-located
>>> with LinuxCon.
>>> 
>>> An announcement regarding the location and dates for MesosCon North
>>> American 2016 should be made in early January. We’ll keep the mailing lists
>>> up-to-date on MesosCon Europe and MesosCon China as well, and the Linux
>>> Foundation has already begun exploring locations in Europe.
>>> 
>>> *Structure of MesosCon Program Committee*
>>> Following the first two MesosCon events (Chicago 2014, Seattle 2015)
>>> where I was conference chair, we shook up our organizational structure for
>>> MesosCon Europe 2015 by adopting a conference chair trio, including myself
>>> (independent), David Greenberg (Two Sigma), and Kiersten Gaffney
>>> (Mesosphere).
>>> 
>>> Why the structure of three co-chairs? To ensure there aren’t bottle-necks
>>> in the planning process, to better divide up the conference work without
>>> having too many people involved, and to ensure balanced representation and
>>> neutral participation — no one company or group will dominate the direction
>>> or organization of the conference. Final decisions are being made by the
>>> three of us.
>>> 
>>> Coming out of MesosCon Europe, we’ve continued that structure and have
>>> also included Chris Schaefer and Chris Aniszczyk in the provisional
>>> planning of 2016 conferences given their consistent participation in
>>> planning previous events. The idea is to add additional program committee
>>> members as needed and during the proposal review process, but finalize the
>>> basics before we grow our ranks — we’ll let the mailing lists know if/when
>>> we need your help!
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm confused, there seemed to be nothing wrong with the earlier structure
>> where the PMC was decided on as a result of a call to action on the mailing
>> list. This resulted in a very open and democratic PMC with fairly broad
>> participation from the community. This year, for instance we had
>> representatives from multiple companies and geographic regions. Openness
>> and community participation has been a hallmark of Mesoscon. Reaching out
>> the community has been a constant theme (e.g asking community participation
>> for selecting talks) and one which has made Mesoscon one of the most
>> inclusive and open conferences. Having a very small group decide the basics
>> and further decide if any help is needed seems like a step in the reverse
>> direction.
>> 
>> I can understand that there are logistical issues and challenges as
>> Mesoscon grows bigger, but we should also keep in mind the spirit of
>> Mesoscon. As it stands the current standing committee is much less diverse
>> both in terms of corporate background and geographical spread than this
>> year's PMC. Perhaps we can keep the core and invite volunteers from the
>> community from the get go rather than on a as needed basis for narrowly
>> defined roles ?
>> 
>>> 
>>> If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, let us know! We look
>>> forward to sharing future updates, and seeing you at a MesosCon in 2016!
>>> 
>>> Dave
>>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: Update on MesosCon 2016 Planning

[Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org>]

Have no fear: the spirit of MesosCon has not changed, nor has the conference's organization become less open. A key difference is that the event chair is now a set of co-chairs (a system we successfully adopted for MesosCon Europe in October). By moving beyond the previous structure where I was the benevolent dictator, we're even more open than before.

Reading between the lines a bit, I assume the concern is with the larger program committee (PC) and ambiguity of its future given the formalization of co-chairs. The PC structure is not set in stone, nor should it ever be IMO. No event is the same, and as the community continues to grow and evolve, the structure and participation should reflect the needs of the community and of the conference. To advance future conference planning with the Linux Foundation (we’re already discussing events 12-months away), the conference co-chair structure gives the stability and decision-making ability to keep the conference moving forward.

In practice, what does this mean for the future of the PC? It will still be composed of the aforementioned co-chairs, along with a set of community volunteers who will help with the program and numerous other parts of the conference organization. For context, with MesosCon Seattle we had volunteers working on the program, and a series of subcommittees including event experience (which included the conference's diversity initiative), program and keynote speaker selection, and sponsorship -- none of those things have been nailed down yet. We haven't gotten to the stage of having a call for volunteers yet for any of the 2016 events, but stay tuned!

Among other open features of the conference that I’d like to see continue: our tradition of an open review process for speaking proposals. There are no plans to change that.

Another concern that was brought up was that the conference would less-reflect the geography of the community and different companies represented. That’s not the case, and we’ve actively taken steps to avoid that. All co-chairs work for different companies, and we're committed to the conference being a vendor-neutral event. In terms of geography, for MesosCon Europe we ensured we had folks from London and Amsterdam on the PC to help us make decisions -- and we did bias talk selection toward local speakers — our goal being to encourage growth of the European Mesos community.

Does that answer your questions and concerns?

Dave

> On Dec 21, 2015, at 9:22 PM, Abhishek Parolkar <ab...@parolkar.com> wrote:
> 
> I am curious to know that as well, about the reason for this change.  We
> could benefit alot by staying open as it has been.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Arunabha Ghosh <ar...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello Mesos Community!
>>> 
>>> About a week ago I had an email exchange with the Mesos PMC regarding the
>>> future of MesosCon, the community-driven conference for the Apache Mesos
>>> community. This is an abbreviated version of that email — I wanted to make
>>> sure we are transparent about where things stand, and give a peak at next
>>> year!
>>> 
>>> *MesosCon in 2016*
>>> We’re looking at holding three MesosCon events in 2016: North America in
>>> (early) June, MesosCon Europe (date TBD), and to expand the conference
>>> internationally with MesosCon China (end of year, possibly December). The
>>> Linux Foundation will continue to handle logistics and sponsorship for
>>> these events, and we’re excited to continue our relationship with them as
>>> we grow the conference in scale and internationally. The only potential
>>> difference is that our 2016 events may be stand-alone instead of co-located
>>> with LinuxCon.
>>> 
>>> An announcement regarding the location and dates for MesosCon North
>>> American 2016 should be made in early January. We’ll keep the mailing lists
>>> up-to-date on MesosCon Europe and MesosCon China as well, and the Linux
>>> Foundation has already begun exploring locations in Europe.
>>> 
>>> *Structure of MesosCon Program Committee*
>>> Following the first two MesosCon events (Chicago 2014, Seattle 2015)
>>> where I was conference chair, we shook up our organizational structure for
>>> MesosCon Europe 2015 by adopting a conference chair trio, including myself
>>> (independent), David Greenberg (Two Sigma), and Kiersten Gaffney
>>> (Mesosphere).
>>> 
>>> Why the structure of three co-chairs? To ensure there aren’t bottle-necks
>>> in the planning process, to better divide up the conference work without
>>> having too many people involved, and to ensure balanced representation and
>>> neutral participation — no one company or group will dominate the direction
>>> or organization of the conference. Final decisions are being made by the
>>> three of us.
>>> 
>>> Coming out of MesosCon Europe, we’ve continued that structure and have
>>> also included Chris Schaefer and Chris Aniszczyk in the provisional
>>> planning of 2016 conferences given their consistent participation in
>>> planning previous events. The idea is to add additional program committee
>>> members as needed and during the proposal review process, but finalize the
>>> basics before we grow our ranks — we’ll let the mailing lists know if/when
>>> we need your help!
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm confused, there seemed to be nothing wrong with the earlier structure
>> where the PMC was decided on as a result of a call to action on the mailing
>> list. This resulted in a very open and democratic PMC with fairly broad
>> participation from the community. This year, for instance we had
>> representatives from multiple companies and geographic regions. Openness
>> and community participation has been a hallmark of Mesoscon. Reaching out
>> the community has been a constant theme (e.g asking community participation
>> for selecting talks) and one which has made Mesoscon one of the most
>> inclusive and open conferences. Having a very small group decide the basics
>> and further decide if any help is needed seems like a step in the reverse
>> direction.
>> 
>> I can understand that there are logistical issues and challenges as
>> Mesoscon grows bigger, but we should also keep in mind the spirit of
>> Mesoscon. As it stands the current standing committee is much less diverse
>> both in terms of corporate background and geographical spread than this
>> year's PMC. Perhaps we can keep the core and invite volunteers from the
>> community from the get go rather than on a as needed basis for narrowly
>> defined roles ?
>> 
>>> 
>>> If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, let us know! We look
>>> forward to sharing future updates, and seeing you at a MesosCon in 2016!
>>> 
>>> Dave
>>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: Update on MesosCon 2016 Planning

[Abhishek Parolkar <ab...@parolkar.com>]

I am curious to know that as well, about the reason for this change.  We
could benefit alot by staying open as it has been.




On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Arunabha Ghosh <ar...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello Mesos Community!
>>
>> About a week ago I had an email exchange with the Mesos PMC regarding the
>> future of MesosCon, the community-driven conference for the Apache Mesos
>> community. This is an abbreviated version of that email — I wanted to make
>> sure we are transparent about where things stand, and give a peak at next
>> year!
>>
>> *MesosCon in 2016*
>> We’re looking at holding three MesosCon events in 2016: North America in
>> (early) June, MesosCon Europe (date TBD), and to expand the conference
>> internationally with MesosCon China (end of year, possibly December). The
>> Linux Foundation will continue to handle logistics and sponsorship for
>> these events, and we’re excited to continue our relationship with them as
>> we grow the conference in scale and internationally. The only potential
>> difference is that our 2016 events may be stand-alone instead of co-located
>> with LinuxCon.
>>
>> An announcement regarding the location and dates for MesosCon North
>> American 2016 should be made in early January. We’ll keep the mailing lists
>> up-to-date on MesosCon Europe and MesosCon China as well, and the Linux
>> Foundation has already begun exploring locations in Europe.
>>
>> *Structure of MesosCon Program Committee*
>> Following the first two MesosCon events (Chicago 2014, Seattle 2015)
>> where I was conference chair, we shook up our organizational structure for
>> MesosCon Europe 2015 by adopting a conference chair trio, including myself
>> (independent), David Greenberg (Two Sigma), and Kiersten Gaffney
>> (Mesosphere).
>>
>> Why the structure of three co-chairs? To ensure there aren’t bottle-necks
>> in the planning process, to better divide up the conference work without
>> having too many people involved, and to ensure balanced representation and
>> neutral participation — no one company or group will dominate the direction
>> or organization of the conference. Final decisions are being made by the
>> three of us.
>>
>> Coming out of MesosCon Europe, we’ve continued that structure and have
>> also included Chris Schaefer and Chris Aniszczyk in the provisional
>> planning of 2016 conferences given their consistent participation in
>> planning previous events. The idea is to add additional program committee
>> members as needed and during the proposal review process, but finalize the
>> basics before we grow our ranks — we’ll let the mailing lists know if/when
>> we need your help!
>>
>
> I'm confused, there seemed to be nothing wrong with the earlier structure
> where the PMC was decided on as a result of a call to action on the mailing
> list. This resulted in a very open and democratic PMC with fairly broad
> participation from the community. This year, for instance we had
> representatives from multiple companies and geographic regions. Openness
> and community participation has been a hallmark of Mesoscon. Reaching out
> the community has been a constant theme (e.g asking community participation
> for selecting talks) and one which has made Mesoscon one of the most
> inclusive and open conferences. Having a very small group decide the basics
> and further decide if any help is needed seems like a step in the reverse
> direction.
>
> I can understand that there are logistical issues and challenges as
> Mesoscon grows bigger, but we should also keep in mind the spirit of
> Mesoscon. As it stands the current standing committee is much less diverse
> both in terms of corporate background and geographical spread than this
> year's PMC. Perhaps we can keep the core and invite volunteers from the
> community from the get go rather than on a as needed basis for narrowly
> defined roles ?
>
>>
>> If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, let us know! We look
>> forward to sharing future updates, and seeing you at a MesosCon in 2016!
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
>

Re: Update on MesosCon 2016 Planning

[Abhishek Parolkar <ab...@parolkar.com>]

I am curious to know that as well, about the reason for this change.  We
could benefit alot by staying open as it has been.




On Mon, Dec 21, 2015 at 1:30 PM, Arunabha Ghosh <ar...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org> wrote:
>
>> Hello Mesos Community!
>>
>> About a week ago I had an email exchange with the Mesos PMC regarding the
>> future of MesosCon, the community-driven conference for the Apache Mesos
>> community. This is an abbreviated version of that email — I wanted to make
>> sure we are transparent about where things stand, and give a peak at next
>> year!
>>
>> *MesosCon in 2016*
>> We’re looking at holding three MesosCon events in 2016: North America in
>> (early) June, MesosCon Europe (date TBD), and to expand the conference
>> internationally with MesosCon China (end of year, possibly December). The
>> Linux Foundation will continue to handle logistics and sponsorship for
>> these events, and we’re excited to continue our relationship with them as
>> we grow the conference in scale and internationally. The only potential
>> difference is that our 2016 events may be stand-alone instead of co-located
>> with LinuxCon.
>>
>> An announcement regarding the location and dates for MesosCon North
>> American 2016 should be made in early January. We’ll keep the mailing lists
>> up-to-date on MesosCon Europe and MesosCon China as well, and the Linux
>> Foundation has already begun exploring locations in Europe.
>>
>> *Structure of MesosCon Program Committee*
>> Following the first two MesosCon events (Chicago 2014, Seattle 2015)
>> where I was conference chair, we shook up our organizational structure for
>> MesosCon Europe 2015 by adopting a conference chair trio, including myself
>> (independent), David Greenberg (Two Sigma), and Kiersten Gaffney
>> (Mesosphere).
>>
>> Why the structure of three co-chairs? To ensure there aren’t bottle-necks
>> in the planning process, to better divide up the conference work without
>> having too many people involved, and to ensure balanced representation and
>> neutral participation — no one company or group will dominate the direction
>> or organization of the conference. Final decisions are being made by the
>> three of us.
>>
>> Coming out of MesosCon Europe, we’ve continued that structure and have
>> also included Chris Schaefer and Chris Aniszczyk in the provisional
>> planning of 2016 conferences given their consistent participation in
>> planning previous events. The idea is to add additional program committee
>> members as needed and during the proposal review process, but finalize the
>> basics before we grow our ranks — we’ll let the mailing lists know if/when
>> we need your help!
>>
>
> I'm confused, there seemed to be nothing wrong with the earlier structure
> where the PMC was decided on as a result of a call to action on the mailing
> list. This resulted in a very open and democratic PMC with fairly broad
> participation from the community. This year, for instance we had
> representatives from multiple companies and geographic regions. Openness
> and community participation has been a hallmark of Mesoscon. Reaching out
> the community has been a constant theme (e.g asking community participation
> for selecting talks) and one which has made Mesoscon one of the most
> inclusive and open conferences. Having a very small group decide the basics
> and further decide if any help is needed seems like a step in the reverse
> direction.
>
> I can understand that there are logistical issues and challenges as
> Mesoscon grows bigger, but we should also keep in mind the spirit of
> Mesoscon. As it stands the current standing committee is much less diverse
> both in terms of corporate background and geographical spread than this
> year's PMC. Perhaps we can keep the core and invite volunteers from the
> community from the get go rather than on a as needed basis for narrowly
> defined roles ?
>
>>
>> If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, let us know! We look
>> forward to sharing future updates, and seeing you at a MesosCon in 2016!
>>
>> Dave
>>
>
>

Re: Update on MesosCon 2016 Planning

[Arunabha Ghosh <ar...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org> wrote:

> Hello Mesos Community!
>
> About a week ago I had an email exchange with the Mesos PMC regarding the
> future of MesosCon, the community-driven conference for the Apache Mesos
> community. This is an abbreviated version of that email — I wanted to make
> sure we are transparent about where things stand, and give a peak at next
> year!
>
> *MesosCon in 2016*
> We’re looking at holding three MesosCon events in 2016: North America in
> (early) June, MesosCon Europe (date TBD), and to expand the conference
> internationally with MesosCon China (end of year, possibly December). The
> Linux Foundation will continue to handle logistics and sponsorship for
> these events, and we’re excited to continue our relationship with them as
> we grow the conference in scale and internationally. The only potential
> difference is that our 2016 events may be stand-alone instead of co-located
> with LinuxCon.
>
> An announcement regarding the location and dates for MesosCon North
> American 2016 should be made in early January. We’ll keep the mailing lists
> up-to-date on MesosCon Europe and MesosCon China as well, and the Linux
> Foundation has already begun exploring locations in Europe.
>
> *Structure of MesosCon Program Committee*
> Following the first two MesosCon events (Chicago 2014, Seattle 2015) where
> I was conference chair, we shook up our organizational structure for
> MesosCon Europe 2015 by adopting a conference chair trio, including myself
> (independent), David Greenberg (Two Sigma), and Kiersten Gaffney
> (Mesosphere).
>
> Why the structure of three co-chairs? To ensure there aren’t bottle-necks
> in the planning process, to better divide up the conference work without
> having too many people involved, and to ensure balanced representation and
> neutral participation — no one company or group will dominate the direction
> or organization of the conference. Final decisions are being made by the
> three of us.
>
> Coming out of MesosCon Europe, we’ve continued that structure and have
> also included Chris Schaefer and Chris Aniszczyk in the provisional
> planning of 2016 conferences given their consistent participation in
> planning previous events. The idea is to add additional program committee
> members as needed and during the proposal review process, but finalize the
> basics before we grow our ranks — we’ll let the mailing lists know if/when
> we need your help!
>

I'm confused, there seemed to be nothing wrong with the earlier structure
where the PMC was decided on as a result of a call to action on the mailing
list. This resulted in a very open and democratic PMC with fairly broad
participation from the community. This year, for instance we had
representatives from multiple companies and geographic regions. Openness
and community participation has been a hallmark of Mesoscon. Reaching out
the community has been a constant theme (e.g asking community participation
for selecting talks) and one which has made Mesoscon one of the most
inclusive and open conferences. Having a very small group decide the basics
and further decide if any help is needed seems like a step in the reverse
direction.

I can understand that there are logistical issues and challenges as
Mesoscon grows bigger, but we should also keep in mind the spirit of
Mesoscon. As it stands the current standing committee is much less diverse
both in terms of corporate background and geographical spread than this
year's PMC. Perhaps we can keep the core and invite volunteers from the
community from the get go rather than on a as needed basis for narrowly
defined roles ?

>
> If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, let us know! We look
> forward to sharing future updates, and seeing you at a MesosCon in 2016!
>
> Dave
>

Re: Update on MesosCon 2016 Planning

[Arunabha Ghosh <ar...@gmail.com>]

On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 12:00 AM, Dave Lester <da...@davelester.org> wrote:

> Hello Mesos Community!
>
> About a week ago I had an email exchange with the Mesos PMC regarding the
> future of MesosCon, the community-driven conference for the Apache Mesos
> community. This is an abbreviated version of that email — I wanted to make
> sure we are transparent about where things stand, and give a peak at next
> year!
>
> *MesosCon in 2016*
> We’re looking at holding three MesosCon events in 2016: North America in
> (early) June, MesosCon Europe (date TBD), and to expand the conference
> internationally with MesosCon China (end of year, possibly December). The
> Linux Foundation will continue to handle logistics and sponsorship for
> these events, and we’re excited to continue our relationship with them as
> we grow the conference in scale and internationally. The only potential
> difference is that our 2016 events may be stand-alone instead of co-located
> with LinuxCon.
>
> An announcement regarding the location and dates for MesosCon North
> American 2016 should be made in early January. We’ll keep the mailing lists
> up-to-date on MesosCon Europe and MesosCon China as well, and the Linux
> Foundation has already begun exploring locations in Europe.
>
> *Structure of MesosCon Program Committee*
> Following the first two MesosCon events (Chicago 2014, Seattle 2015) where
> I was conference chair, we shook up our organizational structure for
> MesosCon Europe 2015 by adopting a conference chair trio, including myself
> (independent), David Greenberg (Two Sigma), and Kiersten Gaffney
> (Mesosphere).
>
> Why the structure of three co-chairs? To ensure there aren’t bottle-necks
> in the planning process, to better divide up the conference work without
> having too many people involved, and to ensure balanced representation and
> neutral participation — no one company or group will dominate the direction
> or organization of the conference. Final decisions are being made by the
> three of us.
>
> Coming out of MesosCon Europe, we’ve continued that structure and have
> also included Chris Schaefer and Chris Aniszczyk in the provisional
> planning of 2016 conferences given their consistent participation in
> planning previous events. The idea is to add additional program committee
> members as needed and during the proposal review process, but finalize the
> basics before we grow our ranks — we’ll let the mailing lists know if/when
> we need your help!
>

I'm confused, there seemed to be nothing wrong with the earlier structure
where the PMC was decided on as a result of a call to action on the mailing
list. This resulted in a very open and democratic PMC with fairly broad
participation from the community. This year, for instance we had
representatives from multiple companies and geographic regions. Openness
and community participation has been a hallmark of Mesoscon. Reaching out
the community has been a constant theme (e.g asking community participation
for selecting talks) and one which has made Mesoscon one of the most
inclusive and open conferences. Having a very small group decide the basics
and further decide if any help is needed seems like a step in the reverse
direction.

I can understand that there are logistical issues and challenges as
Mesoscon grows bigger, but we should also keep in mind the spirit of
Mesoscon. As it stands the current standing committee is much less diverse
both in terms of corporate background and geographical spread than this
year's PMC. Perhaps we can keep the core and invite volunteers from the
community from the get go rather than on a as needed basis for narrowly
defined roles ?

>
> If you have any comments, questions, or concerns, let us know! We look
> forward to sharing future updates, and seeing you at a MesosCon in 2016!
>
> Dave
>