On 14 June 2012 14:27, Joey STANFORD <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > >> I'd like to expand on this and bring up that I think Connect needs to move >> away from planning based on individual teams to cross-organizational >> tracks. I think this will alleviate of the scheduling pressure we had this >> time >> and create a more cohesive experience for everyone involved. So instead >> of having a bunch of random sessions in one day, we could have 3 tracks per >> day (ex: Android Upstreaming, Neon Optimizations, KVM) and we can have >> sessions from any groups that are relevant to that topic. This would mean >> that on certain days some groups may not have a session scheduled but >> I think that's OK. > > Interesting idea. > > Doing this has some advantages: > > * You don't need summit's "maximize attendee session time" algorithm > and could get by fine without it. > > * Topic based tracks pulls the entire organization together to work > on epic projects, which I suspect is the way we want to move to. It > points us towards organization goals vs individual and team goals.
+1k > * Since you're working on topics, the ability to callout what those > sessions are should become much easier and can be done much earlier. > This would also eliminate the need for the Sunday night "let's huddle > and fix the schedule" activity. Even if we kept it, I suspect it would > go dramatically quicker. I think ideally we just have sessions around current Linaro cards and sessions to create new cards. > * We'd see a reduction in meeting rooms but an increase in > fishbowl/circular ballroom size rooms. Hangouts would be easier since > there would be less machines to care for each hour but we would have > need for additional microphones. > > > There is one big challenge I can see... > > * Big rooms, lots of people, lots of interruptions. 50 minutes might > not be enough so perhaps we'd need to double the session time. This > would mean two large sessions per track per day (since we only do this > in the morning) for a total of 6 big sessions a day. I often have > felt that a 50 minute session time is too short for productive work > anyway. Basically we could run each session like a 2 hour > mini-summit. Each session would likely need to have several topics > but that's par for course a lot of the time now. > > > I can accommodate networking, scheduler, and AV for this without a > problem. It /might/ be difficult finding a place with larger style > rooms though. It's challenging to reconfigure the plenary style room > to something that work for this format. What if we have just 4 big spaces that get statically scheduled for the week and then do everything else in free floating breakout sessions? > Joey -- Zach Pfeffer Android Platform Team Lead, Linaro Platform Teams Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~linaro-project-management Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~linaro-project-management More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
