Hi everyone,
This note is a follow-up to this discussion thread.
Around the middle of April, the CloudStack PMC received an e-mail indicating
(to our surprise) that we needed to provide the people organizing Montreal’s
upcoming ApacheCon (which includes the CloudStack Collab Conf) with a schedu
Hi Ron,
We (mainly Giles and Will, from what I am aware) are still in the process of
finalizing how many rooms we get and for how long, so – unfortunately – we
can’t answer your questions at least at this time.
We’re making progress on that front, though.
Thanks,
Mike
On 4/5/18, 10:28 PM, "Ro
By the time you go through one and write up a commentary, you have used
quite a bit of your discretionary time.
How many days are in the review period?
How many reviewers have volunteered?
I would hope that key organizers of the conference are only reviewing
finalists where the author has al
Perfect…then, unless anyone has other opinions they’d like to share on the
topic, let’s follow that approach.
On 4/5/18, 9:43 AM, "Rafael Weingärtner" wrote:
That is exactly it.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Tutkowski, Mike
wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> I think a
That is exactly it.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Tutkowski, Mike
wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> I think as long as we (the CloudStack Community) have the final say on how
> we fill our allotted slots in the CloudStack track of ApacheCon in
> Montreal, then it’s perfectly fine for us to leverage Apa
Hi Rafael,
I think as long as we (the CloudStack Community) have the final say on how we
fill our allotted slots in the CloudStack track of ApacheCon in Montreal, then
it’s perfectly fine for us to leverage Apache’s normal review process to gather
all the feedback from the larger Apache Communi
What is your doubt?
I am proposing the community that instead of creating a group to review, we
can create only a group to select/organize CloudStack presentations
according to the grades/ranking created by the whole Apache Community.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:15 AM, manas biswal
wrote:
> Good D
Good Day
Could you please elaborate bit more
As earlier I was working with Apache CloudStack
Currently I am working with OpenStack for NFV deployment, Telco
acceleration etc.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 2:28 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think everybody that “rai
I think everybody that “raised their hands here” already signed up to
review.
Mike, what about if we only gathered the reviews from Apache main review
system, and then we use that to decide which presentations will get in
CloudStack tracks? Then, we reduce the work on our side (we also remove
bias
Hi Ron,
I don’t actually have insight into how many people have currently signed up
online to be CFP reviewers for ApacheCon. At present, I’m only aware of those
who have responded to this e-mail chain.
We should be able to find out more in the coming weeks. We’re still quite early
in the proc
How many people have signed up to be reviewers?
I don't think that scheduling is part of the review process and that can
be done by the person/team "organizing" ApacheCon on behalf of the PMC.
To me review is looking at content for
- relevance
- quality of the presentations (suggest fixes to c
Thanks for the feedback, Will!
I agree with the approach you outlined.
Thanks for being so involved in the process! Let’s chat with Giles once he’s
back to see if we can get your questions answered.
> On Mar 31, 2018, at 10:14 PM, Will Stevens wrote:
>
> In the past the committee was chosen a
Hi Ron,
I am definitely open to working this however makes the most sense.
It looks like Will’s e-mail indicates that the process I suggested has been
followed in the past (which is how I recall, as well).
Let’s make sure I understood Will correctly.
Will – Are you, in fact, indicating that wh
I am not sure about your concern in that case.
I am not sure why people not interested in Cloudstack would volunteer as
reviewers and want to pick bad presentations.
I would be more worried that there are not enough good presentations
proposed rather than some meritorious presentation will get
Hi Ron,
From what I understand, the CloudStack proposals will be mixed in with all of
the ApacheCon proposals.
In the past when I’ve participated in these CloudStack panels to review
proposals, we had to compare each proposal against the others to arrive at a
balance of topics (i.e. not all ne
Is this a real concern?
Why would a large number of Apache contributors who are not interested
in Cloudstack (enough to outvote those "part of the Cloudstack
community") get involved as reviewers
Reviewing involves some commitment of time so I am hard pressed to guess
why some Apache contribu
Hi Rafael,
It’s a little bit tricky in our particular situation. Allow me to explain:
As you are likely aware, the CloudStack Collaboration Conference will be held
as a track in the larger ApacheCon conference in Montreal this coming September.
It is true, as you say, that anyone who wishes to
I'm happy to chip in.
paul.an...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
-Original Message-
From: Will Stevens
Sent: 27 March 2018 21:20
To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: users
Subject: Re: Committee to Sort throug
Are we going to have a separated review process?
I thought anybody could go here [1] and apply for a reviewer position and
start reviewing. Well, that is what I did. I have already reviewed some
CloudStack proposals (of course I did not review mines). After asking to
review presentations, Rich has
I can help with this.
2018-03-27 17:32 GMT-03:00 Khosrow Moossavi :
> I can help as well.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Will Stevens
> wrote:
>
> > I can support this.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Will
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 12:39 PM Tutkowski, Mike, <
> mike.tutkow...@netapp.com
I can help as well.
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 4:19 PM, Will Stevens wrote:
> I can support this.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Will
>
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2018, 12:39 PM Tutkowski, Mike, >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > As you may be aware, this coming September in Montreal, the CloudStack
> > Community w
21 matches
Mail list logo
