Schedule Decision Process

[Tom Callaway]

Here is the proposal I'd like to put forth for determining the Flock
Schedule.

* We form a "conference committee" which includes:
- Ruth, Robyn, and Myself
- One appointed member from each:
 - Fedora Board
 - FESCo
 - FAMSco

* We open the call for talks (and for scheduled 2hr
hackfests/sprints/workshops), and collect titles and abstracts. Everyone
submits talks, as many as they're willing to give.

* When the call is closed, we take the titles and abstracts, anonymized,
and put them into the Fedora elections app. All CLA+1 contributors can
vote a score of 0-10 for each proposed talk/hackfest/sprint/workshop. We
leave this open for an announced window of time.

* When voting is done, the conference committee will review the results
and determine the final approved talks. They will see the un-anonymized
submissions. They will also reach out to Sponsors who donated at Gold or
above and requested a guaranteed talk on the schedule and confirm their
choice. In the case of Red Hat, they are guaranteed three slots, due to
the large amount of money being spent.

* The committee will reserve the "morning, before lunch" times for 45
minute talks, and "after lunch" times for 2 sprints/hackfests/workshops
in each room, unless we don't have enough good fits for the entire
schedule, then we'll adjust as necessary. We'll also have a slotted time
for lightning talks (they will not need to be submitted beforehand, we
will collect them at Flock).

* They will announce the finalized schedule (un-anonymized) and put it
on the Flock website.

thoughts?

~tom

==
Fedora Project

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 10:58:24AM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> Here is the proposal I'd like to put forth for determining the
> Flock
> Schedule.
>
> * We form a "conference committee" which includes:
> - Ruth, Robyn, and Myself
> - One appointed member from each:
>  - Fedora Board
>  - FESCo
>  - FAMSco
>
> * We open the call for talks (and for scheduled 2hr
> hackfests/sprints/workshops), and collect titles and abstracts. Everyone
> submits talks, as many as they're willing to give.
>
> * When the call is closed, we take the titles and abstracts, anonymized,
> and put them into the Fedora elections app. All CLA+1 contributors can
> vote a score of 0-10 for each proposed talk/hackfest/sprint/workshop. We
> leave this open for an announced window of time.
>
> * When voting is done, the conference committee will review the results
> and determine the final approved talks. They will see the un-anonymized
> submissions. They will also reach out to Sponsors who donated at Gold or
> above and requested a guaranteed talk on the schedule and confirm their
> choice. In the case of Red Hat, they are guaranteed three slots, due to
> the large amount of money being spent. 
Would the sponsors only be guarateed talks, or would they be able to
request a hackfest/sprint/workshop if they wanted?

> * The committee will reserve the "morning, before lunch"
> times for 45
> minute talks, and "after lunch" times for 2 sprints/hackfests/workshops
> in each room, unless we don't have enough good fits for the entire
> schedule, then we'll adjust as necessary. We'll also have a slotted time
> for lightning talks (they will not need to be submitted beforehand, we
> will collect them at Flock).
>
> * They will announce the finalized schedule (un-anonymized) and put it
> on the Flock website.
>
> thoughts? 
This sounds like a good plan to me.  I'll volunteer to be the FESCo rep.

josh

[Tom Callaway]

On 04/30/2013 12:56 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:

>  Would the sponsors only be guarateed talks, or would they be able to
>  request a hackfest/sprint/workshop if they wanted? 
We'd consider requests for the longer hackfest/sprint/workshop from
sponsors if they wanted it.

>  This sounds like a good plan to me.  I'll volunteer to be the
> FESCo rep. 
I think we'll leave it up to the committees to determine their
representatives if we go with this model. ;)

~tom

==
Fedora Project

[Josh Boyer]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 01:22:32PM -0400, Tom Callaway wrote:
> On 04/30/2013 12:56 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
> > Would the sponsors only be guarateed talks, or would they be able to
> > request a hackfest/sprint/workshop if they wanted?
>
> We'd consider requests for the longer hackfest/sprint/workshop from
> sponsors if they wanted it.
>
> > This sounds like a good plan to me.  I'll volunteer to be the FESCo rep.
>
> I think we'll leave it up to the committees to determine their
> representatives if we go with this model. ;) 
Well, of course.  I meant "I am going to tell FESCo I'll volunteer", not
"I am appointing myself".

josh

[S.Kemter]

Hi

2013/4/30 Tom Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com&gt;

>  Here is the proposal I'd like to put forth for determining the
> Flock
>  Schedule.
>
>  * We form a "conference committee" which includes:
>  - Ruth, Robyn, and Myself
>  - One appointed member from each:
>   - Fedora Board
>   - FESCo
>   - FAMSco
>
>  * We open the call for talks (and for scheduled 2hr
>  hackfests/sprints/workshops), and collect titles and abstracts. Everyone
>  submits talks, as many as they're willing to give.
>
>  * When the call is closed, we take the titles and abstracts, anonymized,
>  and put them into the Fedora elections app. All CLA+1 contributors can
>  vote a score of 0-10 for each proposed talk/hackfest/sprint/workshop. We
>  leave this open for an announced window of time.
>
>  * When voting is done, the conference committee will review the results
>  and determine the final approved talks. They will see the un-anonymized
>  submissions. They will also reach out to Sponsors who donated at Gold or
>  above and requested a guaranteed talk on the schedule and confirm their
>  choice. In the case of Red Hat, they are guaranteed three slots, due to
>  the large amount of money being spent.
>
>  * The committee will reserve the "morning, before lunch" times for 45
>  minute talks, and "after lunch" times for 2 sprints/hackfests/workshops
>  in each room, unless we don't have enough good fits for the entire
>  schedule, then we'll adjust as necessary. We'll also have a slotted time
>  for lightning talks (they will not need to be submitted beforehand, we
>  will collect them at Flock).
>
>  * They will announce the finalized schedule (un-anonymized) and put it
>  on the Flock website.
>
>  thoughts?
>  
mmh, interested what you want to use for the voting


br gnokii

>  ~tom
>
>  ==
>  Fedora Project
>  _______________________________________________
>  flock-planning mailing list
>  flock-planning(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/flock-planning
>  


-- 
make me rich, buy my Inkscape book http://is.gd/yq5OD0 ;)

[Tom Callaway]

On 04/30/2013 02:44 PM, S.Kemter wrote:
>  mmh, interested what you want to use for the voting 
Hoping to just reuse the elections app.

~tom

==
Fedora Project

[inode0]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Tom Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  Here is the proposal I'd like to put forth for determining the
> Flock
>  Schedule.
>
>  * We form a "conference committee" which includes:
>  - Ruth, Robyn, and Myself
>  - One appointed member from each:
>   - Fedora Board
>   - FESCo
>   - FAMSco
>
>  * We open the call for talks (and for scheduled 2hr
>  hackfests/sprints/workshops), and collect titles and abstracts. Everyone
>  submits talks, as many as they're willing to give.
>
>  * When the call is closed, we take the titles and abstracts, anonymized,
>  and put them into the Fedora elections app. All CLA+1 contributors can
>  vote a score of 0-10 for each proposed talk/hackfest/sprint/workshop. We
>  leave this open for an announced window of time. 
It will be very interesting to see if there is community interest in
doing this step.

>  * When voting is done, the conference committee will review the
> results
>  and determine the final approved talks. They will see the un-anonymized
>  submissions. They will also reach out to Sponsors who donated at Gold or
>  above and requested a guaranteed talk on the schedule and confirm their
>  choice. In the case of Red Hat, they are guaranteed three slots, due to
>  the large amount of money being spent.
>
>  * The committee will reserve the "morning, before lunch" times for 45
>  minute talks, and "after lunch" times for 2 sprints/hackfests/workshops
>  in each room, unless we don't have enough good fits for the entire
>  schedule, then we'll adjust as necessary. We'll also have a slotted time
>  for lightning talks (they will not need to be submitted beforehand, we
>  will collect them at Flock).
>
>  * They will announce the finalized schedule (un-anonymized) and put it
>  on the Flock website.
>
>  thoughts? 
Sounds reasonable to me.

John

[Stephen Gallagher]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 04/30/2013 10:58 AM, Tom Callaway wrote:
>  Here is the proposal I'd like to put forth for determining the
>  Flock Schedule.
>  
>  * We form a "conference committee" which includes: - Ruth, Robyn,
>  and Myself - One appointed member from each: - Fedora Board -
>  FESCo - FAMSco
>  
>  * We open the call for talks (and for scheduled 2hr 
>  hackfests/sprints/workshops), and collect titles and abstracts.
>  Everyone submits talks, as many as they're willing to give.
>  
>  * When the call is closed, we take the titles and abstracts,
>  anonymized, and put them into the Fedora elections app. All CLA+1
>  contributors can vote a score of 0-10 for each proposed
>  talk/hackfest/sprint/workshop. We leave this open for an announced
>  window of time.
>   
Given that this conference is intended not just for existing
contributors but also to encourage future contributors, I'd like to
suggest we allow CLA signers to vote, not just CLA+1.


>  * When voting is done, the conference committee will review the
>  results and determine the final approved talks. They will see the
>  un-anonymized submissions. They will also reach out to Sponsors who
>  donated at Gold or above and requested a guaranteed talk on the
>  schedule and confirm their choice. In the case of Red Hat, they are
>  guaranteed three slots, due to the large amount of money being
>  spent.
>  
>  * The committee will reserve the "morning, before lunch" times for
>  45 minute talks, and "after lunch" times for 2
>  sprints/hackfests/workshops in each room, unless we don't have
>  enough good fits for the entire schedule, then we'll adjust as
>  necessary. We'll also have a slotted time for lightning talks (they
>  will not need to be submitted beforehand, we will collect them at
>  Flock).
>  
>  * They will announce the finalized schedule (un-anonymized) and put
>  it on the Flock website.
>  
>  thoughts?
>  
>  ~tom
>  
>  == Fedora Project
>   
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlGBaRMACgkQeiVVYja6o6NUKwCgi+h9jiUFUxTOfPqlX/maBIUZ
> TLUAoJzj56oqXmvlpKBG+o8/px8L8IA+
> =Wlym
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[Tom Callaway]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/01/2013 03:12 PM, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>  I'd like to suggest we allow CLA signers to vote, not just CLA+1.
The only concern I have with that is that I don't want people to
create throwaway accounts just to vote up something, but that probably
isn't a real problem. Especially since the committee will be able to
override anything that looks like its been voted up and is bogus:

Battle of the Century: 100 duck sized horses vs 1 horse sized duck,
who will win? [300,000 votes]

Okay. Consider the proposal amended to say "CLA".

~tom

==
Fedora Project
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAlGBcA0ACgkQPF6ZrZMFQmADvgCeOXO7d2dCjNwZGVA7THR1JHJJ
> LzoAnjrIxbkuTFoYlH1DnYXr3w+aXF+x
> =QxDk
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[inode0]

On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 2:12 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:
>  On 04/30/2013 10:58 AM, Tom Callaway wrote:
> > Here is the proposal I'd like to put forth for determining the
> > Flock Schedule.
> >
> > * We form a "conference committee" which includes: - Ruth, Robyn,
> > and Myself - One appointed member from each: - Fedora Board -
> > FESCo - FAMSco
> >
> > * We open the call for talks (and for scheduled 2hr
> > hackfests/sprints/workshops), and collect titles and abstracts.
> > Everyone submits talks, as many as they're willing to give.
> >
> > * When the call is closed, we take the titles and abstracts,
> > anonymized, and put them into the Fedora elections app. All CLA+1
> > contributors can vote a score of 0-10 for each proposed
> > talk/hackfest/sprint/workshop. We leave this open for an announced
> > window of time.
> >
>
>  Given that this conference is intended not just for existing
>  contributors but also to encourage future contributors, I'd like to
>  suggest we allow CLA signers to vote, not just CLA+1. 
I wouldn't disagree but I don't really see any reason to draw the line
there either. The people "voting" aren't the people who will be there
to attend the sessions so they just comprise a larger session
selection committee in my mind. And since new contributors (and
perhaps many Flock attendees) aren't necessarily even in FAS it could
just as well be something broader. Ideally it would be those attending
but that isn't going to work far in advance of the conference. Drawing
a line for this seems pretty arbitrary, so whatever is convenient
works for me.

John