also sprach Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> [2014-09-22 05:13 +0200]:
> FWIW, I think most BoFs could actually be usefully backed by
> a "survey"-type paper -- ie, one that provided background info on
> the topic that would help someone who's interested, but not fully
> up to date, to participate usefully in the BoF.
Cool idea, for two reasons IMHO: it can really help bootstrap a BoF
into something more useful than spending some time first
synchronising, and it would also increase the barrier of entry
somewhat, thereby ensuring that not everyone registers a BoF on
everything.
> If you wanted to have ten/twenty minute talks on a topic, like say
> different aspects of Gnome or different parts of OpenStack,
> I don't see why you couldn't just schedule either one or two
> 1-hour slots and have the mini-talks run within that. Maybe even
> run it in the same format as a regular one-hour talk, and save
> questions to the end, and have all the speakers available as
> a panel for the last fifteen minutes or similar.
Yeah, I think that having two smaller sessions in the 1hr slot
should not make them two entirely independent sessions. And you can
probably even ask two people assigned to those slots to coordindate
it between them.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org
DebConf16 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)