I just ran through a trial of voting on the flock 2013 sessions. Some
general thoughts about that:
* I really want to know the speaker names.
- There's a few talks that are very similar. Judging which one I want to
go to largely depends on who was giving it.
* As I was voting, I felt that I didn't personally want to go to some of the
hackfests (already overcommitted on the hackfests that I need to go to)
but I also felt like that shouldn't stop that hackfest from being held.
If three people were already planning on attending flock and were excited
to hold a Fedora on Alpha hackfest with each other I don't think we'd do
anything (or could ;-) to stop them.
- Maybe in the future we could separate the hackfests into a separate
section. Hackfests where the organizer would be attending flock would
have their hackfests accepted to the schedule. Hackfests where the
hackfest organizer needed sponsorship money to attend could be vetted to
determine whether we would fund them or not.
* Many of the similar sessions are talks about how we might want to change
Fedora. I don't think the talk format is going to serve us well here as
we're going to have different people giving competing proposals in
different time slots throughout the conference with potentially disjoint
attendees. It seems like it would be better to merge these types of
future-planning into a one-day "hackfest" session. People could each be
given 15-30 minutes to present a proposal for the future of Fedora
(hopefully with the proposal online in advance so that people could
consolidate if their proposal had significant overlap with someone
else's). At the end of the presentations, the attendees could try and
come to consensus on some of the changes to make a single proposal or at
least, narrow the field a bit. This could then be presented to the
conference as a whole (and mailing lists after the conference) as
a proposal or starting point for discussion about the future.
-Toshio
Show replies by date