[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-discuss] Talk != BOF


On Friday 09 June 2006 23:42, Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> That requirement is, of course, entirely up to the organizers. The
> Debconf organizers have declared that all talks must be accompanied by
> papers.
> Of course, saying "give your talk as a BOF instead" is *exactly* the
> kind of behavior that leads to BOFs that are not a meeting of interested
> peers, but talks in disguise. "Demoting" talks into BOFs is just wrong.
> Some topics are best served with a talk, others with a BOF, and moving
> between them isn't a particularly good idea. (Some topics are served
> well with either, or both, of course.)

We discussed this in the "how was debconf6, what was good, what needs 
improvement" add-hoc-session on the grass in Oaxtepec. And also after dc6 on 
irc on #debconf-team.

We came up with following types: 

1. talk (more or less like the talks this year)
2. presentations (no paper in advance required, no sponsorship given)
3. bof (more or less like the bofs this year)
4. ad-hoc bofs (not in schedule)

In the #debconf-team irc logs there are more fine grained definitions (though 
nothing finished yet), but I wont dig them out now. Sorry :)

Also the names are by no means final. Though I wont call the 2nd type 
"keynote" as that term is usually reserved for opening talks (or 
presentations). And I also now do realize that "presentation" might not be 
the best name for that kind of, aeh, talks. But having different names for 
different stuff is important.


Attachment: pgpxvKicCn9Qq.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: