Generally I am finding the proposals to be pretty good (as they usually are).
With respect to de-duping I suggest we stay focused on reviewing talks independent of other submissions at this point. It is likely that some of the supplicates will just drop out at this first review. Rich can then work with the appropriate PMCs to de-dupe more fully (Rich I'm happy to help with this process) Ross Gardler (@rgardler) Senior Technology Evangelist Microsoft Open Technologies, Inc. A subsidiary of Microsoft Corporation On 2 February 2014 04:48, Rich Bowen <rbo...@rcbowen.com> wrote: > With the CFP closed (officially ... it appears that there are still talks > coming in ... geez) we have 250+ talk proposals, including: > > 7 lightning talks > 15 tutorials > 1 mini-summit (ie, a whole track managed by itself) > 3 labs (I don't know what labs are. Do you think they meant tutorials?) > > Which leaves us with approx 226 talks to slot into approx 165 actual > sessions. So we have to identify 60 talks that we're not going to run, or > which can be fallback sessions, ie, a speaker who is already scheduled, who > has a talk that they're willing to give on an as-needed basis. In the past > we've needed anywhere from zero to 4 fallbacks per day. > > So, if you're on the reviewer list, get started. > > I know that the CFP system isn't ideal, so if you have comments you'd like > to make about it, please keep track of them so that we can get them to the > LF folks for next time. I know I have some of my own already. > > And if you're the IRC type, come hang out on #apachecon on Freenode, where > we've been discussing things on and off. > > -- > Rich Bowen - rbo...@rcbowen.com - @rbowen > http://apachecon.com/ - @apachecon > >
