Hi Roman,
This info was received from LF: Apache: Big Data Europe gathered 432 attendees
from 36 countries with over 194 companies represented.
They haven't sent an update on CORE yet.~M
From: Roman Shaposhnik
To: ComDev
Sent: Monday,
Yeah, sorry. Here's the numbers I've got at the moment:
Core: Around 200
Big Data: 432
We suspect that both events were strongly affected by the refugee
situation in Budapest in the final weeks of registration, as well as by
the conflict with Strata. Both of these are things that we believe
I renamed the group and meetup to Apache cTAKES now. Is the script
subscribing for anything with "Apache" in the text?
On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
>
> On 10/19/2015 07:08 PM, Henry Martinez wrote:
>>
>> OK Thanks, good looking out. Im having little
On 10/19/2015 07:08 PM, Henry Martinez wrote:
OK Thanks, good looking out. Im having little trouble. I only have my phone
I wouldn't like to have a desató would've b better
I'm sorry, I don't know what this means, can you say differently?
Meanwhile, I've updated the meetups page, and I
On 19 October 2015 at 17:37, sebb wrote:
> On 19 October 2015 at 16:19, Sam Ruby wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 11:12 AM, sebb wrote:
>>> On 19 October 2015 at 12:55, Sam Ruby wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19,
Somehow, I haven't received any of the messages in this conversation
after my first one. Not sure what happened there ...
My change was because the phrasing of the reports is confusing. The
'committee group' phrasing trips me up every single time. The
information in there is useful, but it's
If LF would be willing, I would really like for us to take this
further under consideration!
> On Oct 19, 2015, at 11:30 AM, Rich Bowen wrote:
>
> As the liaison to The Linux Foundation, who does ot ApacheCon events in Eu
> and NA, I'd ask do you want to do this under that
On 20 October 2015 at 21:23, Rich Bowen wrote:
> Somehow, I haven't received any of the messages in this conversation after
> my first one. Not sure what happened there ...
>
> My change was because the phrasing of the reports is confusing. The
> 'committee group' phrasing