-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 58
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Summit Planning: Draft Agenda #166
Comments
I have created the form in https://forms.gle/tES95r4qQfxx7GKs7 and added a few collaborators. Please request the collaborator permission of this if you want it. A few tweaks:
|
Please can we not merge the |
@guybedford Sure, I added the modules discussion back in the form. I don't think we need to recollect data in this case - these two sessions should scheduled together (it does not really make sense to do them e.g. on separate days in separate places), so we can just take the one with the highest attendance as reference when picking the slot/room and leave an extended slot for them. |
@joyeecheung many thanks. That sounds preferable, although if they can't be scheduled together that wouldn't be a problem either. |
Is there a social/dinner event being planned as part of the agenda? |
I sent out an email to all the attendees a couple of hours ago and included
a link to the agenda and Joyee's survery so that we can hopefully answer
some of these questions. If anyone received it, I would love to know.
Eventbrite says it sent it, but for some reason, I feel a bit nervous about
it. Yes, there is going to be a party after the end of the first day that
saucelabs is sponsoring.
…On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 9:07 AM James M Snell ***@***.***> wrote:
Is there a social/dinner event being planned as part of the agenda?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#166>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKYQ3QPDCQQJFHSIJUFANNTPW26LRANCNFSM4HONL4KQ>
.
--
Eva Howe
This Dot Labs
eva@thisdot.co
|
@evahowe can confirm I've received the above email, and another, subjects:
Both are helpful :) |
yay!!! thank you for letting me know! :)
…On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 7:39 PM Manil Chowdhury ***@***.***> wrote:
@evahowe <https://github.com/evahowe> can confirm I've received the above
email, and another, subjects:
- Excited for Collab Summit 2019?? (includes links mentioned)
- OpenJS Collaborator Summit Attendance Survey
Both are helpful :)
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#166>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKYQ3QN4CLT2WOUNQZ2GPRLPW5IPTANCNFSM4HONL4KQ>
.
--
Eva Howe
This Dot Labs
eva@thisdot.co
|
I got the email as well. |
Awesome!
On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 1:28 PM Michael Dawson ***@***.***> wrote:
I got the email as well.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#166>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKYQ3QIPEO2CU632ZENZ6XDPXBFYHANCNFSM4HONL4KQ>
.
--
Eva Howe
This Dot Labs
eva@thisdot.co
|
@keywordnew @joyeecheung I requested it to be 16:00, and it is communicated with @RRomoff also because she would be joining remotely. In the sheet history, I see it was updated anonymously by someone yesterday. |
Sorry about that. The requirement must not have been preserved. We moved
around a few sessions yesterday. This was one of the ones that got moved up
because we felt folks might be more tired than ideal for engagement by end
of day.
If the 1600 slot is empty, please feel free to move it back there. I don't
have a laptop right now.
…On Wed., May 29, 2019, 17:45 Waleed Ashraf, ***@***.***> wrote:
@keywordnew <https://github.com/keywordnew> @joyeecheung
<https://github.com/joyeecheung>
Do you guys know who and why changed the timing for "Node.js Collection &
Social Media" from 16:00 to 13:00?
I requested it to be 16:00, and it is communicated with @RRomoff
<https://github.com/RRomoff> also because she would be joining remotely.
In the sheet history, I see it was updated anonymously by someone
yesterday.
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#166>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ACO3J4YK6BCRB55N3BCODN3PX2QIXANCNFSM4HONL4KQ>
.
|
@keywordnew |
From a glance of the draft agenda, I don't think we are doing a good job at grouping them into tracks. Looking at the survey results, it would make more sense if we have at least three rough tracks:
and leave one room for each, so that people interested in a certain topic don't have to move around so often and will have less conflicts - I suspect there will be quite a lot of conflicts in particular for the 14:00 session on the first day when we have We could also leave one room open for just hacking and conversation. |
How would you resolve that conflict? I’m not super concerned about tracks, mainly to create a bit of dynamics in people moving through rooms to create some more conversations in the hallway. I guess we’ll hack some bits of the agenda tomorrow morning as usual? |
@mcollina I thought the coffee breaks and the lunches are where we have the hallway tracks? Also the slots are probably longer than necessary for many sessions so we will have plenty of time to move around. For people who don't really know each other in person, it seems odd to just start a conversation with strangers in the hallway while there is an agenda happening. For people who already know each other in person...they may just make use of an empty room to chat. Can we shift the Munchen 4 sessions to Muchen 1 if possible? It is a bit confusing that sometimes Munchen 4 is empty while sometimes Munchen 1 is empty. If there are just two rooms used for sessions, people can just go in and check out instead of wandering around. There seems to be some slots with only one session going on on the second day, maybe we could move one of those 14:00 sessions there. It's slightly better if there are only two sessions happening at the same time. |
I think so. Which sessions/slots specifically (from -> to)?
+1! |
How about the following changes for Muchen 4 sessions:
Then we will not have sessions in Muchen 4 and will only have them in either the main room or Muchen 1 |
I’m +1 to those changes apart from the last one. I highly suspect that the audience of Building Node with GN is going to overlap with the release working group participants. |
@mcollina Maybe swap the release WG with i18n then? Then we will have
|
+1! |
Finalized agenda here: https://github.com/nodejs/summit/blob/master/2019-05-Berlin/agenda.md Feel free to PR any requests to change! |
Final Agenda: https://github.com/nodejs/summit/blob/master/2019-05-Berlin/agenda.md
Google Sheet: sheet
Sheet Name: All Rooms
Please let us know, via issue comment or cell comment in the spreadsheet, whether:
Please be mindful not to accidentally edit the spreadsheet. Time permitting, @joyeecheung has offered to do the scheduling survey to minimize the number of conflicts we might have. We're just hoping to get as much info as we can upfront, so we can help those who want to attend remotely plan accordingly.
I'll reiterate that this is not final and that unfortunately we probably won't be able to resolve all conflicts. But we'll try our best!
We plan to collect comments on this document, then move the schedule into the repo when we finalize it next week.
Agenda Questions to: @jorydotcom, @mcollina, @keywordnew, @evahowe
AV Questions to: @evahowe, @LaRuaNa, @christian_bromann
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: