On 16 February 2015 at 20:38, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>
> On 02/16/2015 12:06 PM, jan i wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> No response here, so I assume the FFT will be covered by Nick.
>>
>
> My impression was that he was saying that he was *not* doing it, and was
> looking for a replacement.
So was mine, but I
On 02/16/2015 12:06 PM, jan i wrote:
Hi
No response here, so I assume the FFT will be covered by Nick.
My impression was that he was saying that he was *not* doing it, and was
looking for a replacement.
rgds
jan i.
On 13 February 2015 at 12:48, jan i wrote:
On 12 February 2015
Hi
No response here, so I assume the FFT will be covered by Nick.
rgds
jan i.
On 13 February 2015 at 12:48, jan i wrote:
>
>
> On 12 February 2015 at 23:23, Nick Burch wrote:
>
>> Hi All
>>
>> Hopefully most of you will know about the Fast Feather Track? For those
>> who don't, it's often de
On 12 February 2015 at 23:23, Nick Burch wrote:
> Hi All
>
> Hopefully most of you will know about the Fast Feather Track? For those
> who don't, it's often described as:
>
> a series of short talks, 10-20 minutes in length, covering things that
>> are new / interesting / exciting / incubating /
On 02/02/2014 01:41 PM, Nick Burch wrote:
On Sun, 2 Feb 2014, Rich Bowen wrote:
Nick, can you tell me how you envision the Fast Feather track
working, from a scheduling perspective?
ie, do we just give you a day-long slot and say "go for it", or is
there more that we need to do on the schedu
On Sun, 2 Feb 2014, Rich Bowen wrote:
Nick, can you tell me how you envision the Fast Feather track working,
from a scheduling perspective?
ie, do we just give you a day-long slot and say "go for it", or is there
more that we need to do on the scheduling side to accept specific talks
for that
