RE: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

, 2015 3:23 PM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed) Awesome Nick. Is there a recording or something for it? Hadrian On 02/04/2015 06:10 PM, Nick Burch wrote: > On Wed, 4 Feb 2015, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: >> For example, I would lov

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

Awesome Nick. Is there a recording or something for it? Hadrian On 02/04/2015 06:10 PM, Nick Burch wrote: On Wed, 4 Feb 2015, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: For example, I would love to have some kind of an event at the ApacheCON that would encourage as many folks as possible to learn about various A

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

On Wed, 4 Feb 2015, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: For example, I would love to have some kind of an event at the ApacheCON that would encourage as many folks as possible to learn about various ASF projects. I have some ideas around running a kind of lighting talks/reading group where each participant

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

ng us back down that road. ApacheCon is an LF event that uses and ASF brand. We look after the brand, they look after the event. Ross -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2015 10:29 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

On 02/04/2015 01:04 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: Rich, There is no need to pick on OFBiz. I have organized the speakers for ACEU 2012, ACEU 2014 and together with Sharan interesting talks for ACNA 2015 are lined up. Each were/are full tracks. Again for ACNA2015 I experienced unwillingness upfron at

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 5:58 AM, Rich Bowen wrote: > On 02/04/2015 03:42 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: >> >> We are discussing again, as it seems to me, what the purpose of the >> Apachecon is based on talks submitted. And why is that? >> >> It appears, at least to me as I have seen the discussions befor

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

rosoft Open Technologies, Inc. > A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation > > -Original Message- > From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com ] > Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2015 9:42 AM > To: dev@community.apache.org > Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed > > &g

RE: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

s and *that* is the point. Rich - thank you. Ross -Original Message- From: Pierre Smits [mailto:pierre.sm...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2015 10:04 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed) Rich, There is no need to pi

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

Rich, There is no need to pick on OFBiz. I have organized the speakers for ACEU 2012, ACEU 2014 and together with Sharan interesting talks for ACNA 2015 are lined up. Each were/are full tracks. Again for ACNA2015 I experienced unwillingness upfron at some parties because of skewed cost/benefit rat

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed On Feb 4, 2015, at 12:05 PM, "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" wrote: > Sally the volunteer can do what she wants > > Sally the contractor has no responsibility for ApacheCon > > We are *not* responsibl

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

> I realize this is in conflict with what some people want (a community event) > but we have other vehicles for such events. > > Sent from my Windows Phone > > From: jan i<mailto:j...@apache.org> > Sent: ‎2/‎4/‎2015 8:59 AM > To: dev@

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

he.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > On 02/04/2015 11:21 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: > >> Sally is not part of the ACNA process. Nobody in the ASF is. This is an

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > On 02/04/2015 11:21 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: > >> Sally is not part of the ACNA process. Nobody in the ASF is. This is an >> LF event. >> >> We can (and should) make recommendations to LF but we are are not to take >> on respon

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On 02/04/2015 11:21 AM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) wrote: Sally is not part of the ACNA process. Nobody in the ASF is. This is an LF event. We can (and should) make recommendations to LF but we are are not to take on responsibility for these things. That takes us back to where we were with

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

erre Smits<mailto:pierre.sm...@gmail.com> Sent: ‎2/‎4/‎2015 7:21 AM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed That might be an idea to explore But remember, you need to investigate the potential before you can allocate square

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

to:j...@zonker.net> Sent: ‎2/‎4/‎2015 7:17 AM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed On Wed, Feb 4, 2015, at 09:07 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Regarding "commercial" or "advertising" presentations; Why shoul

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

It should be an LF call not an ASF one. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Niclas Hedhman<mailto:nic...@hedhman.org> Sent: ‎2/‎4/‎2015 7:08 AM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed Regarding

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

From: jan i<mailto:j...@apache.org> Sent: ‎2/‎4/‎2015 6:27 AM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > On 02/03/2015 04:11 AM, jan i wrote: > >&

RE: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

run event. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Pierre Smits<mailto:pierre.sm...@gmail.com> Sent: ‎2/‎4/‎2015 12:45 AM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed) We are discussi

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

On 02/04/2015 03:42 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: We are discussing again, as it seems to me, what the purpose of the Apachecon is based on talks submitted. And why is that? For what it's worth, we have made a concerted effort for ACNA15 to ask project communities to step up to make ApacheCon wha

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

That might be an idea to explore But remember, you need to investigate the potential before you can allocate square meters. And auctioning only works when demand is higher than supply. There are always capacity limits. Best regards Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM * Services

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015, at 09:07 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > Regarding "commercial" or "advertising" presentations; Why should we > reject > these outright? Why not allocate a track for corporations to present > whatever they like, in 20, 30 or 60 min blocks? And auction out those > slots. Either ther

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

You should be all set! On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Pei Chen wrote: > Hi Craig Ross, > I would be curious to read the CFP for ApacheCon 2015 and will be willing > to help with reviews if the group would allow me to... > Would you be able to add 'peistation' to the CFP review system? > --Pei >

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

Regarding "commercial" or "advertising" presentations; Why should we reject these outright? Why not allocate a track for corporations to present whatever they like, in 20, 30 or 60 min blocks? And auction out those slots. Either there is a market, or there is not... And/or combine them with on-site

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

I guess, a couple of thousand attendees would make a lot of parties happy. Best regards, Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM * Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orrtiz.com On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Niclas H

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Pierre Smits wrote: > Let's face it: the event costs... It cost effort to organise, it uses > precious ASF resources. And net-wise it should be beneficial to both the > projects and the ASF regarding supporting the projects. Meaning adding to > the budgets, or at l

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, Rich Bowen wrote: > > > On 02/03/2015 04:11 AM, jan i wrote: > >> We should really make that clear to people, I strongly believe the general >> opinion is non-project talks are not welcome. I base this on the fact >> that >> a number of talks for Denver and Budape

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On 02/03/2015 04:11 AM, jan i wrote: We should really make that clear to people, I strongly believe the general opinion is non-project talks are not welcome. I base this on the fact that a number of talks for Denver and Budapest was rejected for being too company like. When I started helping

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On 02/03/2015 03:37 PM, Phil Steitz wrote: Right. One thing that might help would be to push back the CFP close date, so there is more time between content selected and the event itself. It's really important that if there are concrete suggestions like this (thanks, Phil) that we make sure

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

On 02/04/2015 03:42 AM, Pierre Smits wrote: We are discussing again, as it seems to me, what the purpose of the Apachecon is based on talks submitted. And why is that? It appears, at least to me as I have seen the discussions before, that the ASF misses a clear strategy regarding the event, wh

Re: Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

On Wed, 4 Feb 2015, Pierre Smits wrote: We are discussing again, as it seems to me, what the purpose of the Apachecon is based on talks submitted. And why is that? I'm not going to answer your email directly, but instead I'm going to try to offer some background and some history, which hopeful

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

poration > > -Original Message- > From: Phil Steitz [mailto:phil.ste...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 12:38 PM > To: dev@community.apache.org > Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed > > On 2/2/15 11:47 AM, jan i wrote: >> On 2 February 2015 at 1

Why the Apachecon (was Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed)

ebruary 3, 2015 12:38 PM > To: dev@community.apache.org > Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed > > On 2/2/15 11:47 AM, jan i wrote: > > On 2 February 2015 at 19:30, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > > >> Agreed! > >> > >> Also, after all is said and done, and Ri

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

: ApacheCon NA CFP closed On 2/2/15 11:47 AM, jan i wrote: > On 2 February 2015 at 19:30, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Agreed! >> >> Also, after all is said and done, and Rich has some time to breathe, >> I'd like to know just how helpful LF was this time around. From th

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On 2/2/15 11:47 AM, jan i wrote: > On 2 February 2015 at 19:30, Jim Jagielski wrote: > >> Agreed! >> >> Also, after all is said and done, and Rich has some >> time to breathe, I'd like to know just how helpful LF >> was this time around. From the sidelines, it seems that >> they really didn't do a

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

Hi Craig Ross, I would be curious to read the CFP for ApacheCon 2015 and will be willing to help with reviews if the group would allow me to... Would you be able to add 'peistation' to the CFP review system? --Pei On Mon, Feb 2, 2015 at 3:18 AM, Rich Bowen wrote: > Thanks so much for people that

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On 03/02/2015 01:11, "jan i" wrote: >We should really make that clear to people, I strongly believe the general >opinion is non-project talks are not welcome. I base this on the fact >that >a number of talks for Denver and Budapest was rejected for being too >company like. Having been a reviewe

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

ourselves first. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Dennis E. Hamilton<mailto:dennis.hamil...@acm.org> Sent: ‎2/‎3/‎2015 8:44 AM To: dev@community.apache.org<mailto:dev@community.apache.org> Subject: RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed -- replying below to -- From:

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

-- replying below to -- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 01:12 To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed On Monday, February 2, 2015, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH) < ross.gard...@microsoft.com> wrote: [ ... ] > Ross: "Hey

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

ll be a lot more successful. If we just relax, and hope LF can lift that alone we will fail and keep telling each other how great projects we have ( which happens to be the truth, but maybe not the whole truth). rgds jan i > Ross > > -Original Message- > From: jan i [mail

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

Sharan and I will go over the talks in the OFBiz track the coming few days, and will get back to everybody with the result. Best regards, Pierre Smits *ORRTIZ.COM * Services & Solutions for Cloud- Based Manufacturing, Professional Services and Retail & Trade http://www.orr

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

art of it. We need ASF people to think outside the ASF box. Ross -Original Message- From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org] Sent: Monday, February 2, 2015 10:47 AM To: dev@community.apache.org Subject: Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed On 2 February 2015 at 19:30, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Agreed! &

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

On 2 February 2015 at 19:30, Jim Jagielski wrote: > Agreed! > > Also, after all is said and done, and Rich has some > time to breathe, I'd like to know just how helpful LF > was this time around. From the sidelines, it seems that > they really didn't do an aggressive job promoting the > event and

Re: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

Agreed! Also, after all is said and done, and Rich has some time to breathe, I'd like to know just how helpful LF was this time around. From the sidelines, it seems that they really didn't do an aggressive job promoting the event and being a pro-active producer in trying to drive speakers. > On F

RE: ApacheCon NA CFP closed

Great job Rich, and those who helped. Sent from my Windows Phone From: Rich Bowen Sent: ‎2/‎2/‎2015 12:19 AM To: dev Subject: ApacheCon NA CFP closed Thanks so much for people that got their last-minute p