-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I can skype.

On 4/29/11 9:12 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
> On 04/29/2011 02:23 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>> That¹s what I get for typing an e-mail at a stop light :)
>>
>> What I was trying to say was that I think the highest value presentation
>> is the general discussion of what Rave is, where it came from, what our
>> goals are, etc.  What I was thinking is we would have one larger talk
>> that
>> is more project and community focused
> +1, that fits with what I had in mind for the first talk.
> 
>> and a technical training where we
>> walk people through how they can apply and develop for Rave in their own
>> organizations.  In this setting we can explore the technologies and
>> options for building widgets.
> I'm not completely sure what you mean with training, but training
> sessions on the ApacheCon are different than "normal" presentations.
> Usually two days before or after the formal 3 day conference are
> reserved for these training sessions, which each may range from 0.5, 1
> or 2 days.
> More importantly though: a participant has to pay separately to join a
> training *and* for a training to be accepted and executed at least a
> minimum number of (paying) participants is required. In the past this
> usually was 9+.
> 
> So, while a training session definitely might be cool, even if accepted
> there is no guarantee upfront you actually get to do it...
> 
> Anyway, I'm absolutely fine if you want to propose such a training
> session, but I'd still like to see a technical oriented *talk* as well
> to address and reach the full potential of the ApacheCON visitors not
> just those willing to pay extra for a training.
> 
>>
>> I am willing to submit whatever proposals need submitting, but I
>> definitely want to participate in the overview talk; maybe as a second
>> (or
>> third) speaker to Ate?
> 
> I'd definitely like a joined presentation. I've done so several times in
> the past (also ApacheCON) it it really works well if each (or more) can
> focus on different aspects. Also more entertaining for the audience, if
> done well :)
> 
> Lets try to work this out today, I'll be available on skype shortly (+/-
> 30 min. from now), anyone else willing to join please just ping me/us.
> 
> Ate
> 
>>
>> On 4/29/11 8:06 AM, "Franklin, Matthew B."<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>
>>> I remembered a couple of days ago and was planning on submitting one
>>> today too.  Do you think splitting them is best?  I was h
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From:     Ate Douma [mailto:[email protected]]
>>> Sent:    Friday, April 29, 2011 05:30 AM Eastern Standard Time
>>> To:    [email protected]
>>> Subject:    ApacheCON NA 2011 CFP: deadline today!
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I almost missed it but suddenly realized I haven't seen any feedback
>>> anymore
>>> about presenting Rave at the ApacheCON NA 2011 (Vancouver) later this
>>> year.
>>>
>>> As the CFP deadline end *today* (midnight Pacific Time), I want to check
>>> if
>>> anyone did send in a proposal.
>>> I remember Matt chiming in before indicating he was willing to come up
>>> with
>>> something?
>>>
>>> Assuming nobody has send in anything yet, I think we maybe could propose
>>> two
>>> separate talks:
>>>
>>> a) Rave Overview and Role (high-level/non-technical):
>>>     history
>>>     community
>>>     goals
>>>     future
>>>
>>> b) Rave Technical:
>>>    background (e.g. originating projects, current usages/examples)
>>>    architecture
>>>    features (small demos)
>>>    goals (functional and technical)
>>>    roadmap
>>>    final grant demo
>>>
>>> Assuming Matt or others might be interested and might have a preference
>>> for the
>>> technical talk, I'm inclined to pitch for the first one and write up a
>>> proposal
>>> for that today. But if someone else has a preference to pick that one up
>>> just
>>> let me know.
>>>
>>> I only want to make sure we're covering both (type of) talks, so if
>>> nobody else
>>> can or want to jump in, I'm even willing to send in proposals for both.
>>>
>>> Please chime in ASAP *today* if/when you are willing to participate in
>>> this, or
>>> already did :)
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ate
>>
> 
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.16 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJNurn3AAoJEOEgD2XReDo5RL4H/2SJkf9tevp1Ey4WdBiF0awx
hA5bNcz1nuVM6j0fPYJKSpERDsTSH82X9T5zd0Q+S45n1dVyTK/1sAz7+c+01HVq
8RH1c0NSYod4NH7We2L3ET60bzkDCcXEW/bUVmiRQsijEx8EcvXHASVNj/L6LymU
CXXcf9aijEiOtWiLVAmygL69FlgVrWdQI5f4WqQNQvb8/z+9WKVQdPdNACwVxj1K
tt0x6r3rrtImrJ3oJ+Q1sIxivO81ZvV+IrOfsihadIsgf7G2HMD/hdQ1KKj+LDDw
mHEpAJKB4fYTnj057Vu+o3N8b26CLbfHI0LeTZ1nbz6nCxuwGcnEDE9JIBi+R84=
=mZH1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to