On 11/10/2010 02:53 AM, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > (I know I'm very late to this discussion, but want to make sure this is > clarified) > > On Wed, Oct 06, 2010 at 03:27:29PM -0600, Duncan McGreggor wrote: >> Let me break that down for easy viewing: >> * Application Developers >> * Application Selection and Defaults >> * Cloud >> * Development Process >> * Hardware Compatibility >> * Other >> * Ubuntu the Project >> >> We had 9 tracks last year and filled them pretty well. We're looking at >> at 2 less this year (as defined above) and probably even more sessions >> than last time (every year our material has grown). > > If you missed it, you might want to review > http://mdzlog.alcor.net/2010/05/27/rethinking-the-ubuntu-developer-summit/ > for some rationale for updating the format. > > We haven't added or subtracted tracks; we've arranged them on a different > axis. Sessions are now listed by topic, rather than by which team happened > to submit them.
Right, all that was understood. At the time that I wrote that email, there were several significant inconsistencies between what was originally proposed on the ubuntu-devel mail list, what was on the tracks page, and the list of tracks on schedule page. Within a day, this was reconciled. >> Unless we're cutting out slots and pushing outlying session topics into >> the community for discussions instead of proper UDS sessions... > > We do not "push topics into the community", because we are part of the > community. UDS is a community event, and all of the sessions at UDS are > "proper", whether they come from a Canonical engineering team like yours or > an individual with a passionate interest in the subject. Yeah, apologies for the poor phrasing on that. I was trying to differentiate between sessions discussed at UDS and those discussed in a less formal, non-UDS format. d -- ubuntu-devel mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
