linaro-project-management team mailing list archive

[Zach Pfeffer <zach.pfeffer@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 14 June 2012 14:27, Joey STANFORD <joey@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>> I'd like to expand on this and bring up that I think Connect needs to move
>> away from planning based on individual teams to cross-organizational
>> tracks. I think this will alleviate of the scheduling pressure we had this time
>> and create a more cohesive experience for everyone involved. So instead
>> of having a bunch of random sessions in one day, we could have 3 tracks per
>> day (ex: Android Upstreaming, Neon Optimizations, KVM) and we can have
>> sessions from any groups that are relevant to that topic. This would mean
>> that on certain days some groups may not have a session scheduled but
>> I think that's OK.
>
> Interesting idea.
>
> Doing this has some advantages:
>
>  * You don't need summit's "maximize attendee session time" algorithm
> and could get by fine without it.
>
>  * Topic based tracks pulls the entire organization together to work
> on epic projects, which I suspect is the way we want to move to. It
> points us towards organization goals vs individual and team goals.

+1k

>  * Since you're working on topics, the ability to callout what those
> sessions are should become much easier and can be done much earlier.
> This would also eliminate the need for the Sunday night "let's huddle
> and fix the schedule" activity. Even if we kept it, I suspect it would
> go dramatically quicker.

I think ideally we just have sessions around current Linaro cards and
sessions to create new cards.

>  * We'd see a reduction in meeting rooms but an increase in
> fishbowl/circular ballroom size rooms. Hangouts would be easier since
> there would be less machines to care for each hour but we would have
> need for additional microphones.
>
>
> There is one big challenge I can see...
>
>  * Big rooms, lots of people, lots of interruptions.  50 minutes might
> not be enough so perhaps we'd need to double the session time. This
> would mean two large sessions per track per day (since we only do this
> in the morning) for a total of 6 big sessions a day.  I often have
> felt that a 50 minute session time is too short for productive work
> anyway.   Basically we could run each session like a 2 hour
> mini-summit.  Each session would likely need to have several topics
> but that's par for course a lot of the time now.
>
>
> I can accommodate networking, scheduler, and AV for this without a
> problem.  It /might/ be difficult finding a place with larger style
> rooms though. It's challenging to reconfigure the plenary style room
> to something that work for this format.

What if we have just 4 big spaces that get statically scheduled for
the week and then do everything else in free floating breakout
sessions?

> Joey



-- 
Zach Pfeffer
Android Platform Team Lead, Linaro Platform Teams
Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro
http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg - http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog