Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 02:59:50PM -0400, micah anderson wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Jun 2010 15:14:41 +0200, Ana Guerrero <ana@debian.org> wrote:
>
> We definitely need to reserve space for last-minute things, however even
> if we go ahead and accept the 26 remaining talks that are in this weird
> state, we still have over 10 slots left over that are not allocated, do
> we need to allocate more than 10 slots for last minute things? That
> seems like a good number to me, but I'd also be open to leaving more, I
> just don't think that we need 36 open slots!
No, we do not need 36 slots, however we will need more than 10 (or reject
stuff because we do not have rooms). In any case, I expect ~3-5 talks
be canceled (speaker no attending, change of mind, etc). So it is ok-ish.
I am happy with:
> I would propose that the best way forward, at this point, taking into
> considerations all the discussions here and on IRC would be this:
>
> 1. send an acceptance to all the currently 'accepted' talks in penta, we
> don't bother including the 'two main rooms' details. it was accepted,
> implementation details come later
>
> 2. send a reject notice to the bottom 20 that did not make the cut due
> to the ratings
>
> 3. accept in penta and send an acceptance email to the middle third that
> we had such a hard time deciding on last night, this email would be no
> different than #1
>
> 4. we schedule Schipiro (414) along with the two main rooms
As long as the rejected talks are *rejected*. Then public this list ASAP
while the schedule is made.
Now we have solved this, the remaininig items we need to figure out:
- Debian Day
- what happens with last minute talks, how are they handled wrt scheduling,
announcing and planning from the video team. Do we left this in the shoulders
of the schedule team?
- how last minute talks will be "named"? (I ask about "track" name) Or
how people know that is something last-minute?
- what will be the difference between las minute talks and the talks we
approve now that will make speakers next year think: why bother sending
a talk before the deadline, i just will send something last minute.
> Doing this will result in plenty of room for last-minute space for
> talks. Determining what to do with talks that were actually rejected
> that are later re-submitted as last-minute would be up to the on the
> ground schedulers.
I would like rejected stuff being kept rejected. But I am ok defering this
to the scheduling team.
> Schedulers will have two unknown variables: if a talk wants V-T
> coverage, and how many people might want to attend any particular
> talk. These are the things that will make scheduling difficult, if we
> don't know them in advance. If its at all possible to add something to
> penta and request that accepted talks indicate, then we should to help
> the scheduling.
I would not worry about how many people want to attend to a talk,
it is totally impossible to know. There is factors like concurrent talk and
timing of talk. I would just worry about the video and wants is to be kept
for people watching from home.
Good luck to the schedulers,
Ana
Reply to: