CFP Update: Flock registration / CFP numbers thus far

[Máirín Duffy]

CFP is closing right now and Patrick is re-opening as we speak as per the plan we'd
agreed on.

Given the number of proposals we have, I am not sure we want to do a full 2-week
extension. Previous Flock orgs, what do you think about the numbers we have right now? If
we decide to keep the extension, I wonder if we close at the 1 week point (22) or the 2
week point (29). Any thoughts? (My cut says close at 22.) Once we know when to close
I'll update the website (I have commits ready to push) and do a blog post so people
know about the extension.

Registration
==========
Registration remains open.
Registrations: 96

(Should we be concerned about this? This seems low to me?)

Session Proposals
===============
Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)

All numbers below include the 2 duplicates (sorry, too difficult to pull out right now.
I'm doing this all manually)

Breakdown of proposal numbers:
--------------------------------------------
Do-Session (3 hrs): 17
Do-Session (2 hrs): 27
Talk (30 min): 50
Talk (60 min): 25
Total proposals: 119

Total minutes: 9300 (155 hours)
Total do minutes: 6300 (105 hours)
Total talk minutes: 3000 (50 hours)

if we accepted all current proposals, it'd require 7 tracks. (note proposals may be
redundant and haven't yet been reviewed.)

% of proposals that are do: 37%
% of proposals that are talk: 63%

% of minutes of proposed do: 68%
% of minutes of proposed talk: 32%

Proposal topics:
=============

I did some manual card sorting by hand of all of the proposals and came up with some rough
clusters / categories. We don't have to go with these, but they're a way to
understand what topics people submitted. Definitions for all topics follow the counts.

Technical Infrastructure and Automation: 26 (could probably be broken up)
What we ship: 19
Disciplines: 18
Community Infrastructure: 14
Modularity: 12
Cloud and Containers: 7
Ecosystem: 2

Technical Infrastructure and Automation (26)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Sessions that involve strategy around the infrastructure that supports and produces Fedora
as we move towards CI/CD and automation as well as sessions about specific components and
technologies that are part of this infrastructure. There's talks about packaging in
here too, not 100% sure they belong.

What we ship (19)
------------------------
Sessions that involve the specific production of the artifacts we ship and the teams/SIGs
that produce them, including Fedora Editions (workstation, server, atomic), spins, arches,
EPEL. 

Disciplines (18)
---------------------
These sessions involve talking about the practice of specific disciplines and the status
of specific discipline-centered teams within Fedora that include: design, marketing,
legal, globalization / internationalization, websites

Community infrastructure (14)
----------------------------------------
Sessions about community management, outreach, ambassadors, diversity, commops: anything
focused on managing community membership at human level in some form.

Modularity (12)
--------------------
Sessions that center on the modularity effort. There are others that mention modularity
but these ones focus on it.

Cloud and Containers (7)
---------------------------------
Sessions about working with cloud platforms, building containers, container tech, etc.

Ecosystem (2)
-------------------
Sessions that involve the ecosystem around Fedora. There's only two, one about Fedora
being included in the Microsoft / Windows ecosystem and one about a hardware vendor. 

Cheers,
~m

[Ruth Suehle]

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  Registration
>  
==========
>  Registration remains open.
>  Registrations: 96
>
>  (Should we be concerned about this? This seems low to me?)
>  
Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of your
speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were accepted?


>  Session Proposals
>  ===============
>  Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
>  
That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given how close
the event is. You may have already discovered this, but you'll find a chunk
of them are duplicates. In the past, we've suggested to people who
submitted similar suggestions that they combine efforts in whatever way
works for them. Sometimes this goes over better than others.

[mohamed fawzy]

Hello,
Can I add session about fedora arab community and Egyptian experience in
adding fedora to prep schools instead of windows and open discussion about
what should we do next? Or is it just a technical sessions.

Thanks

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:16 PM Ruth Suehle <rsuehle(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Máirín Duffy
> <duffy(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>
> > Registration
> >
>  ==========
> > Registration remains open.
> > Registrations: 96
> >
> > (Should we be concerned about this? This seems low to me?)
> >
>
>  Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of your
>  speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were accepted?
>
>
> > Session Proposals
> > ===============
> > Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
> >
>
>  That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given how
>  close the event is. You may have already discovered this, but you'll find a
>  chunk of them are duplicates. In the past, we've suggested to people who
>  submitted similar suggestions that they combine efforts in whatever way
>  works for them. Sometimes this goes over better than others.
>  _______________________________________________
>  flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to
>  flock-planning-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>

[Máirín Duffy]

Hi Mohamed,

The system is still open right now so please propose ASAP. This would be an appropriate
topic for the community track.

Cheers
~m

On June 17, 2017 9:22:40 AM EDT, mohamed fawzy <mohamedfawzy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
wrote:
> Hello,
> Can I add session about fedora arab community and Egyptian experience
> in
> adding fedora to prep schools instead of windows and open discussion
> about
> what should we do next? Or is it just a technical sessions.
>
> Thanks
>
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017, 3:16 PM Ruth Suehle <rsuehle(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 1:43 AM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)redhat.com&gt;
> wrote:
> >
> >> Registration
> >>
> > ==========
> >> Registration remains open.
> >> Registrations: 96
> >>
> >> (Should we be concerned about this? This seems low to me?)
> >>
> >
> > Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of
> your
> > speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were accepted?
> >
> >
> >> Session Proposals
> >> ===============
> >> Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
> >>
> >
> > That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given how
> > close the event is. You may have already discovered this, but you'll
> find a
> > chunk of them are duplicates. In the past, we've suggested to people
> who
> > submitted similar suggestions that they combine efforts in whatever
> way
> > works for them. Sometimes this goes over better than others.
> > _______________________________________________
> > flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to
> > flock-planning-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > 
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Máirín Duffy]

> ==========
> > Registration remains open.
> > Registrations: 96
> >
> Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of
> your
> speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were accepted? 
I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you can't add a
copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the copresenters are registered!

:-/

~m




> > Session Proposals
> > ===============
> > Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
> >
>
> That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given how
> close
> the event is. You may have already discovered this, but you'll find a
> chunk
> of them are duplicates. In the past, we've suggested to people who
> submitted similar suggestions that they combine efforts in whatever way
> works for them. Sometimes this goes over better than others. 
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Trishna Guha]

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
>  I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you
> can't add a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the copresenters are
> registered!
>  
Hi :-). Am I supposed to receive any notification if I am added as a
copresenter for a session?
I have registered.

[Máirín Duffy]

Not by the system. But submitters should not, as we have advised they dont, be adding
others as copresenters without speaking to them about it.

~m

On June 17, 2017 11:58:32 AM EDT, Trishna Guha <trishnaguha17(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Máirín Duffy
> <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
> wrote:
> > I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you can't add
> a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the copresenters
> are registered!
> >
> Hi :-). Am I supposed to receive any notification if I am added as a
> copresenter for a session?
> I have registered. 
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Máirín Duffy]

Also please everyone, lets keep the threads clean so this important OP gets noticed by
other planners. Please ask questions in a new thread or if youd like to aak offlist please
use the email addreas listed for q's at flocktofedora.org.

Thanks
~m

On June 17, 2017 11:58:32 AM EDT, Trishna Guha <trishnaguha17(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 8:45 PM, Máirín Duffy
> <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
> wrote:
> > I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you can't add
> a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the copresenters
> are registered!
> >
> Hi :-). Am I supposed to receive any notification if I am added as a
> copresenter for a session?
> I have registered. 
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Paul W. Frields]

On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:49AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  >==========
>  >> Registration remains open.
>  >> Registrations: 96
>  >>
>  >Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of
>  >your speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were
>  >accepted?
>  
>  I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you can't add
>  a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the
>  copresenters are registered! 
This is a good thing to note for either planning or the app
design... ensuring we figure out who's accepted and not yet completed
registration so we can nagmail as needed.  Should be quite simple to
accomplish but maybe having a button option is worthwhile.  When
should folks receive acceptance notifications?

>  >> Session Proposals
>  >> ===============
>  >> Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
>  >>
>  >
>  >That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given
>  >how close the event is. You may have already discovered this, but
>  >you'll find a chunk of them are duplicates. In the past, we've
>  >suggested to people who submitted similar suggestions that they
>  >combine efforts in whatever way works for them. Sometimes this goes
>  >over better than others. 
FWIW, I agree with this.  Gratitude to Mo for the initial analysis of
numbers.  7 tracks seems like an awful lot at one time, but I
understand talk acceptance often motivates attendance or funding.  I
put in a few notes with my votes (har!) where I saw an opportunity to
combine talks.


-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
    The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:49AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> > >==========
> > >> Registration remains open.
> > >> Registrations: 96
> > >>
> > >Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of
> > >your speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were
> > >accepted?
> >
> > I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you can't add
> > a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the
> > copresenters are registered!
>
>  This is a good thing to note for either planning or the app
>  design... ensuring we figure out who's accepted and not yet completed
>  registration so we can nagmail as needed.  Should be quite simple to
>  accomplish but maybe having a button option is worthwhile.  When
>  should folks receive acceptance notifications?
>
> > >> Session Proposals
> > >> ===============
> > >> Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
> > >>
> > >
> > >That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given
> > >how close the event is. You may have already discovered this, but
> > >you'll find a chunk of them are duplicates. In the past, we've
> > >suggested to people who submitted similar suggestions that they
> > >combine efforts in whatever way works for them. Sometimes this goes
> > >over better than others.
>
>  FWIW, I agree with this.  Gratitude to Mo for the initial analysis of
>  numbers.  7 tracks seems like an awful lot at one time, but I
>  understand talk acceptance often motivates attendance or funding.  I
>  put in a few notes with my votes (har!) where I saw an opportunity to
>  combine talks. 
We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not having any
time for hallway track.

I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor talks vs. "do"
things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks?

josh

[Matthew Miller]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>  We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because
> people
>  find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
>  attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not having any
>  time for hallway track. 
I dunno about "yelled", but I sure do have a strong opinion. I think
too many simultaneous talks reduces collaboration across groups because
there's too many people who go to the thing they're most comfortable
with and then it's the five people there who could just as well be
giving the talk.

Which, actually, might be just fine for "do" sessions. But....

>  I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor talks vs.
> "do"
>  things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks? 
I'm still getting a lot of feedback from people who feel that they need
to be a speaker with a traditional talk in order to get funding. 


-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Fedora Project Leader

[Brian Exelbierd]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017, at 11:17 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>  On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>  > We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
>  > find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
>  > attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not having any
>  > time for hallway track.
>  
>  I dunno about "yelled", but I sure do have a strong opinion. I think
>  too many simultaneous talks reduces collaboration across groups because
>  there's too many people who go to the thing they're most comfortable
>  with and then it's the five people there who could just as well be
>  giving the talk.
>  
>  Which, actually, might be just fine for "do" sessions. But.... 
I strongly support 5 tracks max.  I think more than that is too hard for
most people to conceptually parse.  They wind up trying to figure out
how to eliminate entire tracks from consideration.  That works when an
event has real tracks.  Flock may not ...

>  > I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor
> talks vs. "do"
>  > things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks?
>  
>  I'm still getting a lot of feedback from people who feel that they need
>  to be a speaker with a traditional talk in order to get funding.  
Same here.  This is a message that will take a few Flocks to sink in.  I
think when funding decisions are made we need to be able to demonstrate
that this statement is true in order for people to believe it.

regards,

bex

[Máirín Duffy]

Sorry for top posting, on phone.

I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding hackfest.

Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved hackfest or workshop can give a
short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather than a talk?

~m

On June 19, 2017 4:16:04 PM EDT, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Paul W. Frields
> <stickster(a)gmail.com&gt;
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:49AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> >> >==========
> >> >> Registration remains open.
> >> >> Registrations: 96
> >> >>
> >> >Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of
> >> >your speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were
> >> >accepted?
> >>
> >> I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you can't add
> >> a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the
> >> copresenters are registered!
> >
> > This is a good thing to note for either planning or the app
> > design... ensuring we figure out who's accepted and not yet completed
> > registration so we can nagmail as needed.  Should be quite simple to
> > accomplish but maybe having a button option is worthwhile.  When
> > should folks receive acceptance notifications?
> >
> >> >> Session Proposals
> >> >> ===============
> >> >> Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given
> >> >how close the event is. You may have already discovered this, but
> >> >you'll find a chunk of them are duplicates. In the past, we've
> >> >suggested to people who submitted similar suggestions that they
> >> >combine efforts in whatever way works for them. Sometimes this goes
> >> >over better than others.
> >
> > FWIW, I agree with this.  Gratitude to Mo for the initial analysis of
> > numbers.  7 tracks seems like an awful lot at one time, but I
> > understand talk acceptance often motivates attendance or funding.  I
> > put in a few notes with my votes (har!) where I saw an opportunity to
> > combine talks.
>
> We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
> find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
> attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not having any
> time for hallway track.
>
> I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor talks vs. "do"
> things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks?
>
> josh
> _______________________________________________
> flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to
> flock-planning-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org 
-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

[Brian Exelbierd]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017, at 11:30 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  Sorry for top posting, on phone.
>  
>   I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding
>   hackfest.> 
>   Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved
>   hackfest or workshop can give a short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather
>   than a talk? 
I was noticing the same thing.  I was thinking that we should just
have
an included "talk" - I hadn't decided on length and 5-10 min seems good,
on day 1 to help "level set" the event.
regards,

bex

>  
>   ~m
>  
>  On June 19, 2017 4:16:04 PM EDT, Josh Boyer
>  <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Paul W.
> Frields
> > <stickster(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >>>>  On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:49AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> >>>>>>> ==========
> >>>> 
> >>>>>  Registration remains open.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>  Registrations: 96
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible
> >>>> many of
> >>>>>>>>> your speakers haven't registered, not know if
> their talks were
> >>>>>>>>> accepted?
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>  I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you
> >>>  can't add
> >>>>>>>  a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the
> >>> 
> >>>  copresenters are registered!
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  This is a good thing to note for either planning or the app
> >> 
> >>  design... ensuring we figure out who's accepted and not yet
> >>  completed
> >>>>>  registration so we can nagmail as needed.  Should be quite
> >>  simple to
> >>>>>  accomplish but maybe having a button option is worthwhile.  When
> >>>>>  should folks receive acceptance notifications?
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>>>>  Session Proposals
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>  ===============
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>  Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given
> >>>>>>>>> how close the event is. You may have already
> discovered this, but
> >>>>>>>>> you'll find a chunk of them are duplicates. In
> the past, we've
> >>>>>>>>> suggested to people who submitted similar suggestions
> that they
> >>>>>>>>> combine efforts in whatever way works for them.
> Sometimes this
> >>>> goes
> >>>>>>>>> over better than others.
> >>>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  FWIW, I agree with this.  Gratitude to Mo for the initial
> >>  analysis of
> >>>>>  numbers.  7 tracks seems like an awful lot at one time, but I
> >>>>>  understand talk acceptance often motivates attendance or
> >>  funding.  I
> >>>>>  put in a few notes with my votes (har!) where I saw an
> >>  opportunity to
> >>>>>  combine talks.
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
> >>> find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
> >>> attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not
> > having any
> >>> time for hallway track.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor talks
> > vs. "do"
> >>> things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > josh
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >>> To unsubscribe send an email to flock-planning-
> > leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> 
>  --
>   Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.>
> _________________________________________________
>  flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; To unsubscribe
> send an email to flock-planning-
>  leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[Brian Exelbierd]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017, at 11:30 PM, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  Sorry for top posting, on phone.
>  
>   I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding
>   hackfest.> 
>   Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved
>   hackfest or workshop can give a short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather
>   than a talk? 
Sorry for the second follow up, I hit send too soon.

I also think we should program the "State of ..." talks as 30 min back
to back (or 20?) on one day in one session, possibly a large group
session.  This way the information is widely disseminated.
regards,

bex


>  
>   ~m
>  
>  On June 19, 2017 4:16:04 PM EDT, Josh Boyer
>  <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:>> On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Paul W.
> Frields
> > <stickster(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
> >>>>  On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:49AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> >>>>>>> ==========
> >>>> 
> >>>>>  Registration remains open.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>  Registrations: 96
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible
> >>>> many of
> >>>>>>>>> your speakers haven't registered, not know if
> their talks were
> >>>>>>>>> accepted?
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>>  I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you
> >>>  can't add
> >>>>>>>  a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the
> >>> 
> >>>  copresenters are registered!
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  This is a good thing to note for either planning or the app
> >> 
> >>  design... ensuring we figure out who's accepted and not yet
> >>  completed
> >>>>>  registration so we can nagmail as needed.  Should be quite
> >>  simple to
> >>>>>  accomplish but maybe having a button option is worthwhile.  When
> >>>>>  should folks receive acceptance notifications?
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>>>>  Session Proposals
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>  ===============
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>  Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
> >>>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given
> >>>>>>>>> how close the event is. You may have already
> discovered this, but
> >>>>>>>>> you'll find a chunk of them are duplicates. In
> the past, we've
> >>>>>>>>> suggested to people who submitted similar suggestions
> that they
> >>>>>>>>> combine efforts in whatever way works for them.
> Sometimes this
> >>>> goes
> >>>>>>>>> over better than others.
> >>>> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >>  FWIW, I agree with this.  Gratitude to Mo for the initial
> >>  analysis of
> >>>>>  numbers.  7 tracks seems like an awful lot at one time, but I
> >>>>>  understand talk acceptance often motivates attendance or
> >>  funding.  I
> >>>>>  put in a few notes with my votes (har!) where I saw an
> >>  opportunity to
> >>>>>  combine talks.
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
> >>> find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
> >>> attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not
> > having any
> >>> time for hallway track.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor talks
> > vs. "do"
> >>> things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > josh
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >>> To unsubscribe send an email to flock-planning-
> > leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> >> 
>  --
>   Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.>
> _________________________________________________
>  flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; To unsubscribe
> send an email to flock-planning-
>  leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[Matthew Miller]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 05:30:00PM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding
>  hackfest.
>  
>  Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved hackfest
>  or workshop can give a short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather than a
>  talk? 
In looking through, four possible cases for this came to mind

- Hackfest is for the core group, talk is evangelism to the rest of Fedora
- Talk is a pitch to get people to come to the hackfest
- Talk is a readout of accomplishment at hackfest *
- Talk is really appropriate for first 20 minutes of hackfest, but was
  submitted separately 


* I didn't see any _actual_ examples of this one.



-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Fedora Project Leader

[Máirín Duffy]

On 06/20/2017 01:10 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>  On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 05:30:00PM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
> > I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding
> > hackfest.
> >
> > Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved hackfest
> > or workshop can give a short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather than a
> > talk?
>
>  In looking through, four possible cases for this came to mind
>
>  - Hackfest is for the core group, talk is evangelism to the rest of Fedora
>  - Talk is a pitch to get people to come to the hackfest
>  - Talk is a readout of accomplishment at hackfest *
>  - Talk is really appropriate for first 20 minutes of hackfest, but was
>    submitted separately
>
>
>  * I didn't see any _actual_ examples of this one. 
There was at least one example of this.

It's becoming clear though we should really have SMEs for each sort of 
group in Fedora that plans sessions to make sure they're coordinated. 
E.g. Langdon is serving this role for modularity - he asked for a list 
of modularity talks and he's going to look over them, make sure they'd 
hang together coherently and suggest where to merge / remove things 
depending.... we should have this for each subject area I think. 
(probably not this year, but in the future)

~m

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 01:24:07PM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  It's becoming clear though we should really have SMEs for each
> sort
>  of group in Fedora that plans sessions to make sure they're
>  coordinated. E.g. Langdon is serving this role for modularity - he
>  asked for a list of modularity talks and he's going to look over
>  them, make sure they'd hang together coherently and suggest where to
>  merge / remove things depending.... we should have this for each
>  subject area I think. (probably not this year, but in the future) 
Yeah, nice idea for next year. Cloud/Atomic did this, too.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Fedora Project Leader

[Brian Exelbierd]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017, at 07:10 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>  On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 05:30:00PM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  > I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding> >
> hackfest.
>  >
>  > Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved hackfest> > or
> workshop can give a short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather than a
>  > talk?
>
>  In looking through, four possible cases for this came to mind
>
>  - Hackfest is for the core group, talk is evangelism to the rest of
>  Fedora 
I belive that comments on submissions identified these. 

>  - Talk is a pitch to get people to come to the hackfest 
The proposed schedule has a block of time for this. 

>  - Talk is a readout of accomplishment at hackfest * 
The proposed schedule has a slot for this too :)

>  - Talk is really appropriate for first 20 minutes of hackfest, but
> was>   submitted separately 
I believe comments identified these for combining as well. 

Regards,

bex 

>  * I didn't see any _actual_ examples of this one.
>
>
>
>  --
>  Matthew Miller
>  <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  Fedora Project Leader
>  _______________________________________________
>  flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; To unsubscribe
> send an email to
>  flock-planning-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 5:30 PM Máirín Duffy <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
wrote:

>  Sorry for top posting, on phone.
>
>  I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding
>  hackfest.
>
>  Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved hackfest or
>  workshop can give a short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather than a talk?
>
>  
Actually, I was recommending this approach over the "ad-piece". The
reason
is that the first 30-60 minutes of every hackfest always ends up being an
intro tutorial, which tends to waste the time of the knowledgeable folks in
the group.

I recommended that it would be best to pair a real hackfest with a
30-minute intro tutorial talk so that folks could spend more of the
hackfest time doing actual work. (And also this should mean that the
experienced folks could have that 30 minutes to attend another session).

[Brian Exelbierd]

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017, at 02:22 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  
>  
>  On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 5:30 PM Máirín Duffy
>  <duffy(a)fedoraproject.org&gt; wrote:>> Sorry for top posting, on phone.
> > 
> >  I noticed a pattern where ppl proposed a 30 min talk + corresponding
> >  hackfest.>> 
> >  Maybe we need a session where everyone who has an approved
> >  hackfest or workshop can give a short 5 min ad piece on it? Rather
> >  than a talk?>> 
>  
>  Actually, I was recommending this approach over the "ad-piece". The
>  reason is that the first 30-60 minutes of every hackfest always ends
>  up being an intro tutorial, which tends to waste the time of the
>  knowledgeable folks in the group.> 
>  I recommended that it would be best to pair a real hackfest with a 30-
>  minute intro tutorial talk so that folks could spend more of the
>  hackfest time doing actual work. (And also this should mean that the
>  experienced folks could have that 30 minutes to attend another
>  session). 
I understand this approach. It would be interesting to get feedback from
this year's hackfests on how much this was a challenge. I think we could
also solve this in future years by having do sessions provide more
guidance on attendee expectations. That wasn't uniform this year.
Regards,

bex 

>  _________________________________________________
>  flock-planning mailing list -- flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org&gt; To unsubscribe
> send an email to flock-planning-
>  leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org

[Paul W. Frields]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>  On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Paul W. Frields
> <stickster(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:49AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  >> >==========
>  >> >> Registration remains open.
>  >> >> Registrations: 96
>  >> >>
>  >> >Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many of
>  >> >your speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were
>  >> >accepted?
>  >>
>  >> I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you can't
> add
>  >> a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the
>  >> copresenters are registered!
>  >
>  > This is a good thing to note for either planning or the app
>  > design... ensuring we figure out who's accepted and not yet completed
>  > registration so we can nagmail as needed.  Should be quite simple to
>  > accomplish but maybe having a button option is worthwhile.  When
>  > should folks receive acceptance notifications?
>  >
>  >> >> Session Proposals
>  >> >> ===============
>  >> >> Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
>  >> >>
>  >> >
>  >> >That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given
>  >> >how close the event is. You may have already discovered this, but
>  >> >you'll find a chunk of them are duplicates. In the past, we've
>  >> >suggested to people who submitted similar suggestions that they
>  >> >combine efforts in whatever way works for them. Sometimes this goes
>  >> >over better than others.
>  >
>  > FWIW, I agree with this.  Gratitude to Mo for the initial analysis of
>  > numbers.  7 tracks seems like an awful lot at one time, but I
>  > understand talk acceptance often motivates attendance or funding.  I
>  > put in a few notes with my votes (har!) where I saw an opportunity to
>  > combine talks.
>  
>  We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
>  find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
>  attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not having any
>  time for hallway track. 
I'm probably among that crowd although I try not to yell. ;-)

>  I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor talks vs.
> "do"
>  things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks? 
Or folks find it difficult to translate "thing I'm interested in
talking about" into "action we can take to make Fedora better."  As a
voter, I based votes on whether I thought a session was going to
result in a positive change.  My votes, IIRC, tended to favor the
workshops with more plusses than talks.  My assumption is that not
every session will end up in the program, and we should take guidance
from the FPL & Council's goal of a more practically oriented event.

-- 
Paul W. Frields                                http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://redhat.com/   -  -  -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
    The open source story continues to grow: http://opensource.com

[Brian Exelbierd]

On Mon, Jun 19, 2017, at 11:49 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
>  On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 04:16:04PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>  > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Paul W. Frields <stickster(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > > On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 11:15:49AM -0400, Máirín Duffy wrote:
>  > >> >==========
>  > >> >> Registration remains open.
>  > >> >> Registrations: 96
>  > >> >>
>  > >> >Ordinarily this close we'd be closer to 200. Is it possible many
> of
>  > >> >your speakers haven't registered, not know if their talks were
>  > >> >accepted?
>  > >>
>  > >> I'd say very possible given there's a reg fee now, but you
> can't add
>  > >> a copresenter unless they are reg so at least all of the
>  > >> copresenters are registered!
>  > >
>  > > This is a good thing to note for either planning or the app
>  > > design... ensuring we figure out who's accepted and not yet completed
>  > > registration so we can nagmail as needed.  Should be quite simple to
>  > > accomplish but maybe having a button option is worthwhile.  When
>  > > should folks receive acceptance notifications?
>  > >
>  > >> >> Session Proposals
>  > >> >> ===============
>  > >> >> Session proposals: 117 (119 with 2 duplicates)
>  > >> >>
>  > >> >
>  > >> >That seems like a usable number. I'd consider not extending given
>  > >> >how close the event is. You may have already discovered this, but
>  > >> >you'll find a chunk of them are duplicates. In the past, we've
>  > >> >suggested to people who submitted similar suggestions that they
>  > >> >combine efforts in whatever way works for them. Sometimes this goes
>  > >> >over better than others.
>  > >
>  > > FWIW, I agree with this.  Gratitude to Mo for the initial analysis of
>  > > numbers.  7 tracks seems like an awful lot at one time, but I
>  > > understand talk acceptance often motivates attendance or funding.  I
>  > > put in a few notes with my votes (har!) where I saw an opportunity to
>  > > combine talks.
>  > 
>  > We've been yelled at before to keep it under 5 tracks because people
>  > find more than that way too many.  Something about impossible to
>  > attend everything they want to see while simultaneously not having any
>  > time for hallway track.
>  
>  I'm probably among that crowd although I try not to yell. ;-)
>  
>  > I'd also note that your submissions still heavily favor talks vs.
> "do"
>  > things.  Maybe the attendees prefer the talks?
>  
>  Or folks find it difficult to translate "thing I'm interested in
>  talking about" into "action we can take to make Fedora better."  As a
>  voter, I based votes on whether I thought a session was going to
>  result in a positive change.  My votes, IIRC, tended to favor the
>  workshops with more plusses than talks.  My assumption is that not
>  every session will end up in the program, and we should take guidance
>  from the FPL & Council's goal of a more practically oriented event. 
I truly believe it is this.  I don't think that we have ever really
asked people to translate their ideas into actions as strongly before on
such a large level.  I have voted in favor of things that result in
positive forward movement and in person participation.  This meant that
I had to vote less for things that I were talks I just thought were cool
because I could easily read or watch the same thing.  In several cases
they were talks that I would LOVE to see submitted to other conferences
as part of our marketing/mindshare/outreach efforts.

regards,

bex

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 04:59:42AM +0200, Brian Exelbierd wrote:
>  I truly believe it is this.  I don't think that we have ever
> really
>  asked people to translate their ideas into actions as strongly before on
>  such a large level.  I have voted in favor of things that result in
>  positive forward movement and in person participation.  This meant that 
For what it's worth, I felt like a much greater percentage of the talks
were along these lines than ever before.

>  I had to vote less for things that I were talks I just thought were
> cool
>  because I could easily read or watch the same thing.  In several cases
>  they were talks that I would LOVE to see submitted to other conferences
>  as part of our marketing/mindshare/outreach efforts. 
Ditto. Let's do personalized rejection letters expressing interest in
having these talks at other relevant conferences.

-- 
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
Fedora Project Leader