also sprach Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> [2014-09-22 12:38 +0200]:
> FWIW, that's what I expected "ad-hoc" to mean too. "Scheduling"
> "ad-hoc" talks seems kind of like a contradiction in terms to me.
\o/
> Actually, what if you ran, say, three CFPs? Assuming 75 slots, run
> one with a deadline in March/April 2014 selecting at least 15 but
> no more than 45 talks; a second ending in June/July selecting an
> additional 25-55 talks getting the total up to 60-70; and then
> leaving the final CFP open during the conference for the remaining
> 5-15 slots (that just become empty rooms / hack time if they're
> not filled)?
This is a good idea. I feel like this is also a natural continuation
of how DC14 announced the first and second batch, especially if we
don't disclose the numbers.
> Video of workshops would just be a pain (though screencasts could
> be fun, and a lightning talk or written summary would be a good
> idea). Video/audio of BoFs can be useful, but given the whole
> passing around the microphone deal, is probably too inconvenient.
You are introducing a new concept under a name I already used to
describe hands-on sessions (cf. LCA workshops).
But whatever the name, I like the idea of differentiating pure BoFs
from working group meetings, or turbo sprints, or … ;)
However, I definitely don't think we should even do as much as think
there could be an expectation to cover those kind of events on
video, for the reasons you name, and also because it's just too
strenuous. If our video team ends up being able to commit more
resources, then let individual organisers request coverage (giving
reasons…), but let's not have it be the default.
> Anyway, maybe some of the above makes sense / is interesting? If it
> helps, here's a strawman proposal for what things might look like more
> specifically if you did something like the above:
>
> - Feb-Mar: 1st CFP, accepting 15 to 45 talks
> - Apr: add first round of accepted talks to website
> - May: bursaries approvals
We are almost on the same page, except we want to open registrations
in March and have bursaries info out (in batches) beginning
end-of-March or so.
I certainly like the idea of having batches of talks accepted, and
also of incentivising people to get good proposals in early because
it'll give them the better slots.
> - At debconf (ie, the following is the "ad-hoc" stuff):
> - open scheduling for BoFs (no reserved spaces)
> - workshop slots scheduled by "talks" team 24-36 hours beforehand
> - proposals for ad-hoc talks accepted, scheduled the night before
> the talk slot
This is very much in line with what we were discussing previously,
i.e. accept 30% of the BoFs ahead of time, 40% any time during the
conference, and 30% only 24 hours beforehand.
So this would just need to be fleshed out…
> Average day at the conference might look something like:
[…]
I don't think we want to have BoFs and workshops happen during food
times exclusively.
While I think it's important to keep the general schedule grid
consistent, I don't think it would be a problem to have two
different types of days, e.g. those that are more talks-centric and
those that are more hacking-centric.
Thanks for your input, aj.
--
.''`. 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)