On 19 April 2012 12:58, Zach Pfeffer <zach.pfef...@linaro.org> wrote: > On 19 April 2012 14:47, Deepak Saxena <dsax...@linaro.org> wrote: >> On 19 April 2012 12:15, Zach Pfeffer <zach.pfef...@linaro.org> wrote: >>> On 19 April 2012 13:21, Deepak Saxena <dsax...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>> On 19 April 2012 08:53, Christian Robottom Reis <k...@linaro.org> wrote: >>>>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 10:43:56AM -0500, Zach Pfeffer wrote: >>>>>> While we're planning for connect, I'd like to suggest that we do away >>>>>> with team tracks all together and just have topic tracks. This would >>>>>> align with our topic based approach to things now, and would be a way >>>>>> to breakdown our silo's. The topic track would be lead by a topic >>>>>> champion. What do people think? >>>>> >>>>> I ask myself whether in practice it makes a difference. In practice, at >>>>> Connect, you want somebody to own a certain set of sessions. Splitting >>>>> this by team or by topic seems to have equal drawbacks on either side. >>>> >>>> I'm not really sure if it makes a difference at the end of the day. >>>> Also, are we really talking about topic tracks or sessions here? W/o a >>>> CFP asking for externally developed presentations, I'm not sure we can >>>> end up with many talks about the same topics. >>>> >>>> We're planning on some training sessions for Linaro noobs and also for >>>> what I hope will be a large contingent of member engineers from China, >>>> India, and Korea offices. Should "Training" be a separate track? >>>> >>>> Also to clarify, regardless of whether we go down this path or not, we >>>> will still have time for hacking sessions? >>> >>> I think its actually makes the hacking sessions better. Why have team >>> hacking rooms? We should have topic hacking rooms where each tiger >>> team meets each other and starts to solve the problems they've talked >>> about in the topic planning session. >> >> I dunno. I think a lot of the work we are doing in the groups does not >> directly overlap, and when it does (i.e, platform integration level) >> it's as easy as grabbing the right person. From my experience at prior >> connects, a lot of the decisions around common infrastructure happened >> in the hacking rooms where folks could gather around there computers >> and boards in a shared space. Spreading us across rooms by topic areas >> would loose that cohesiveness that I think is really key to the work >> that happens at Connect. > > I think some of that is just a reflection of our team track > organization. Consider a common goal like: > > Unify all Kernels > > That's a big topic, but if > > Andrea > Mathieu > Lee > Andy Green > Tixy > Vishal > LAVA PoC > Ubuntu PoC > etc... > > Were all on the Unify all Kernels tiger team, they could use connect > to hammer this out. The hacking rooms could then change mid week for > other topic hacking sessions.
OK, that makes sense. Another one would be Android + DT...get your team and the DT folks from KWG together for half a day to hash out anything that's needed. In essence these become extended summit sessions. We need to keep 1-2 rooms open for general hacking in this case for folks who may want to just go deep dive into an area they are working on. ~Deepak _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
