You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@community.apache.org by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> on 2014/01/29 18:53:27 UTC
A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications will
be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of reviews?
There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF presentations
-- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific Apache
project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
volunteered for reviewing, review them?
Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it might be
advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
ok, that's it for now...
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kay Schenk, Apache OpenOffice
"Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
-- James Mason
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
The system gives us accept/reject rankings. If you want to communicate more
than that, email me. Or call me. I want to have talk selections reflect the
opinion of the subject experts.
--
Rich Bowen - RBowen@rcbowen.com
On Jan 29, 2014 5:29 PM, "Roman Shaposhnik" <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
> Since this is my first time helping with the reviews,
> I'm also wondering what's the objective for us
> reviewers? Are we expected to stack-rank
> the proposal in our given areas or weight them
> somehow?
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
> >
> > The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications
> will
> > be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of
> reviews?
> >
> > There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF presentations
> > -- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific
> Apache
> > project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
> > volunteered for reviewing, review them?
> >
> > Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
> > decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it might be
> > advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
> >
> > ok, that's it for now...
> >
> > --
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Kay Schenk, Apache OpenOffice
> >
> > "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
> > for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
> > -- James Mason
>
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org>.
Re: Question 2
It was previously stated that people should review anything they have an
interest in
(http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/community-dev/201401.mbox/%3cCAD6
VreuUk=A5GgC2RtbU9EkJhiufMA4eoXr5q4ssau3xmtgjxA@mail.gmail.com%3e) so
hopefully people who are reviewing anyway will review anything they know
enough about to be able to make an informed decision on.
Certainly I've been reviewing proposals for some of the big data talks
that cover areas I felt confident enough to review
Rob
On 31/01/2014 19:31, "Roman Shaposhnik" <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
>Ok, so we're almost at the finish line as far as review submissions
>go. At this point my dashboard is saying: "You have 191 proposals
>unreviewed.". This is pretty good, but raises a few questions:
>
> 1. I assume that I can wake up in the morning (PST) tomorrow
> and whatever is submitted is it. I'll review the ones that fall into
> my domain and then I can go enjoy some nice Californian weather
> outside. Now, suppose we end up with more accepted talks than
> we have slots in the, lets say, bigdata track. What happens next?
>
> 2. Obviously I shouldn't be reviewing my own talks, but given that
> last time I checked I was the only volunteer in the bigdata space.
> What happens to those? Who will be reviewing them?
>
>Thanks,
>Roman.
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Ted Dunning <te...@gmail.com>.
Roman
You aren't the only big data reviewer. I at least an in there. I think that the apparent solitude is a matter of labels. I labelled myself as mahout, hadoop and zookeeper. You said BigData. Same thing. Different words.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jan 31, 2014, at 19:31, Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Ok, so we're almost at the finish line as far as review submissions
> go. At this point my dashboard is saying: "You have 191 proposals
> unreviewed.". This is pretty good, but raises a few questions:
>
> 1. I assume that I can wake up in the morning (PST) tomorrow
> and whatever is submitted is it. I'll review the ones that fall into
> my domain and then I can go enjoy some nice Californian weather
> outside. Now, suppose we end up with more accepted talks than
> we have slots in the, lets say, bigdata track. What happens next?
>
> 2. Obviously I shouldn't be reviewing my own talks, but given that
> last time I checked I was the only volunteer in the bigdata space.
> What happens to those? Who will be reviewing them?
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 11:58 PM, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>
> On 02/01/2014 04:31 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
>
>> Ok, so we're almost at the finish line as far as review submissions
>> go. At this point my dashboard is saying: "You have 191 proposals
>> unreviewed.". This is pretty good, but raises a few questions:
>>
>> 1. I assume that I can wake up in the morning (PST) tomorrow
>> and whatever is submitted is it. I'll review the ones that fall into
>> my domain and then I can go enjoy some nice Californian weather
>> outside. Now, suppose we end up with more accepted talks than
>> we have slots in the, lets say, bigdata track. What happens next?
>>
>
> Based on the sum of the reviews, I'll need to make final selections. In
> the events where it's not obvious what those selections need to be, I'll
> come back to the folks who have indicated that they care about a particular
> track, and clear my selections by you guys.
sounds like a plan...I've "reviewed" items either related to my project or
items I was personally interested in.
>
>
>
>> 2. Obviously I shouldn't be reviewing my own talks, but given that
>> last time I checked I was the only volunteer in the bigdata space.
>> What happens to those? Who will be reviewing them?
>>
>
> There are a lot of people doing general "this looks interesting" reviews,
> including myself. Hopefully this will result in an eventual clear picture.
> If it doesn't, see above.
>
> Meanwhile, I presume that if someone submits a talk, they themselves think
> it's a good talk.
>
> --
> Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
> http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
>
>
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
-- James Mason
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On 02/01/2014 04:31 AM, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
> Ok, so we're almost at the finish line as far as review submissions
> go. At this point my dashboard is saying: "You have 191 proposals
> unreviewed.". This is pretty good, but raises a few questions:
>
> 1. I assume that I can wake up in the morning (PST) tomorrow
> and whatever is submitted is it. I'll review the ones that fall into
> my domain and then I can go enjoy some nice Californian weather
> outside. Now, suppose we end up with more accepted talks than
> we have slots in the, lets say, bigdata track. What happens next?
Based on the sum of the reviews, I'll need to make final selections. In
the events where it's not obvious what those selections need to be, I'll
come back to the folks who have indicated that they care about a
particular track, and clear my selections by you guys.
>
> 2. Obviously I shouldn't be reviewing my own talks, but given that
> last time I checked I was the only volunteer in the bigdata space.
> What happens to those? Who will be reviewing them?
There are a lot of people doing general "this looks interesting"
reviews, including myself. Hopefully this will result in an eventual
clear picture. If it doesn't, see above.
Meanwhile, I presume that if someone submits a talk, they themselves
think it's a good talk.
--
Rich Bowen - rbowen@rcbowen.com - @rbowen
http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org>.
Ok, so we're almost at the finish line as far as review submissions
go. At this point my dashboard is saying: "You have 191 proposals
unreviewed.". This is pretty good, but raises a few questions:
1. I assume that I can wake up in the morning (PST) tomorrow
and whatever is submitted is it. I'll review the ones that fall into
my domain and then I can go enjoy some nice Californian weather
outside. Now, suppose we end up with more accepted talks than
we have slots in the, lets say, bigdata track. What happens next?
2. Obviously I shouldn't be reviewing my own talks, but given that
last time I checked I was the only volunteer in the bigdata space.
What happens to those? Who will be reviewing them?
Thanks,
Roman.
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
That's my understanding too. It should be easy enough to test this once i'm
not in an airport any more.
--
Rich Bowen, mobile edition
rbowen@rcbowen.com
On Jan 31, 2014 3:30 AM, "Daniel Gruno" <ru...@cord.dk> wrote:
> On 01/31/2014 06:31 AM, Rob Vesse wrote:
> > Out of interest do the speakers see the specific comments individual
> > reviewers post or are these aggregated/anonymised in some way?
> >
> > Rob
>
> As I understand it, speakers cannot see what reviewers write about a
> talk, nor can you see what others write about your own talk if you are a
> reviewer as well as a (potential) speaker. Rich may be able to clarify
> when he gets back to a computer.
>
> With regards,
> Daniel.
>
>
> >
> > On 30/01/2014 04:40, "Rich Bowen" <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> >
> >> The system gives us accept/reject rankings. If you want to communicate
> >> more
> >> than that, email me. Or call me. I want to have talk selections reflect
> >> the
> >> opinion of the subject experts.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Rich Bowen - RBowen@rcbowen.com
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jan 29, 2014 5:29 PM, "Roman Shaposhnik" <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Since this is my first time helping with the reviews,
> >>> I'm also wondering what's the objective for us
> >>> reviewers? Are we expected to stack-rank
> >>> the proposal in our given areas or weight them
> >>> somehow?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Roman.
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
> >>>>
> >>>> The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications
> >>> will
> >>>> be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of
> >>> reviews?
> >>>>
> >>>> There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF
> >>> presentations
> >>>> -- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific
> >>> Apache
> >>>> project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
> >>>> volunteered for reviewing, review them?
> >>>>
> >>>> Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
> >>>> decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it
> >>> might be
> >>>> advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
> >>>>
> >>>> ok, that's it for now...
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> ------
> >> -----------------
> >>>> Kay Schenk, Apache OpenOffice
> >>>>
> >>>> "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
> >>>> for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
> >>>> -- James Mason
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Daniel Gruno <ru...@cord.dk>.
On 01/31/2014 06:31 AM, Rob Vesse wrote:
> Out of interest do the speakers see the specific comments individual
> reviewers post or are these aggregated/anonymised in some way?
>
> Rob
As I understand it, speakers cannot see what reviewers write about a
talk, nor can you see what others write about your own talk if you are a
reviewer as well as a (potential) speaker. Rich may be able to clarify
when he gets back to a computer.
With regards,
Daniel.
>
> On 30/01/2014 04:40, "Rich Bowen" <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>
>> The system gives us accept/reject rankings. If you want to communicate
>> more
>> than that, email me. Or call me. I want to have talk selections reflect
>> the
>> opinion of the subject experts.
>>
>> --
>> Rich Bowen - RBowen@rcbowen.com
>>
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2014 5:29 PM, "Roman Shaposhnik" <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Since this is my first time helping with the reviews,
>>> I'm also wondering what's the objective for us
>>> reviewers? Are we expected to stack-rank
>>> the proposal in our given areas or weight them
>>> somehow?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Roman.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
>>>>
>>>> The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications
>>> will
>>>> be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of
>>> reviews?
>>>>
>>>> There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF
>>> presentations
>>>> -- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific
>>> Apache
>>>> project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
>>>> volunteered for reviewing, review them?
>>>>
>>>> Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
>>>> decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it
>>> might be
>>>> advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
>>>>
>>>> ok, that's it for now...
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------
>> -----------------
>>>> Kay Schenk, Apache OpenOffice
>>>>
>>>> "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
>>>> for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
>>>> -- James Mason
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Rob Vesse <rv...@dotnetrdf.org>.
Out of interest do the speakers see the specific comments individual
reviewers post or are these aggregated/anonymised in some way?
Rob
On 30/01/2014 04:40, "Rich Bowen" <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
>The system gives us accept/reject rankings. If you want to communicate
>more
>than that, email me. Or call me. I want to have talk selections reflect
>the
>opinion of the subject experts.
>
>--
>Rich Bowen - RBowen@rcbowen.com
>
>
>On Jan 29, 2014 5:29 PM, "Roman Shaposhnik" <rv...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Since this is my first time helping with the reviews,
>> I'm also wondering what's the objective for us
>> reviewers? Are we expected to stack-rank
>> the proposal in our given areas or weight them
>> somehow?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Roman.
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>> > As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
>> >
>> > The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications
>> will
>> > be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of
>> reviews?
>> >
>> > There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF
>>presentations
>> > -- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific
>> Apache
>> > project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
>> > volunteered for reviewing, review them?
>> >
>> > Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
>> > decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it
>>might be
>> > advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
>> >
>> > ok, that's it for now...
>> >
>> > --
>> >
>>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>------
>-----------------
>> > Kay Schenk, Apache OpenOffice
>> >
>> > "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
>> > for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
>> > -- James Mason
>>
>
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Roman Shaposhnik <rv...@apache.org>.
Since this is my first time helping with the reviews,
I'm also wondering what's the objective for us
reviewers? Are we expected to stack-rank
the proposal in our given areas or weight them
somehow?
Thanks,
Roman.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 9:53 AM, Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
>
> The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications will
> be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of reviews?
>
> There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF presentations
> -- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific Apache
> project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
> volunteered for reviewing, review them?
>
> Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
> decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it might be
> advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
>
> ok, that's it for now...
>
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Kay Schenk, Apache OpenOffice
>
> "Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
> for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
> -- James Mason
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Kay Schenk <ka...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com> wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2014 12:53 PM, "Kay Schenk" <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
> >
> > The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications
> will
> > be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of
> reviews?
>
> As soon as possible. I dont have a better answer. If you haven't reviewed
> by the time I have to make final selections, I still have to make them
> without.
>
> >
> > There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF presentations
> > -- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific
> Apache
> > project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
> > volunteered for reviewing, review them?
>
> Review everything you have an informed opinion in.
>
> >
> > Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
> > decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it might be
> > advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
>
> Yes. Hopefully multiple people review each talk so that the opinion is
> cumulative. The more the better.
>
> Review everything in which you have an unformed opinion.
>
OK, this helps...
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK
"Cats do not have to be shown how to have a good time,
for they are unfailing ingenious in that respect."
-- James Mason
Re: A couple of questions on ApacheCon, Denver reviews...
Posted by Rich Bowen <rb...@rcbowen.com>.
On Jan 29, 2014 12:53 PM, "Kay Schenk" <ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As I am quite new to this process, a few questions --
>
> The closing date for submissions is Feb 1, and it seems notifications will
> be sent out by Feb 14. So, what is the due date for completion of reviews?
As soon as possible. I dont have a better answer. If you haven't reviewed
by the time I have to make final selections, I still have to make them
without.
>
> There are a few submissions -- aside from some standard ASF presentations
> -- that are somewhat generic and don't directly apply to a specific Apache
> project. So -- who will be reviewing these? Or should anybody that
> volunteered for reviewing, review them?
Review everything you have an informed opinion in.
>
> Can more than one reviewer rate a submission and perhaps change the
> decision of a previous reviewer? Just curious about this. But it might be
> advantageous in some situations to get input from multiple reviewers.
Yes. Hopefully multiple people review each talk so that the opinion is
cumulative. The more the better.
Review everything in which you have an unformed opinion.