18 Dec
2019
18 Dec
'19
1:25 a.m.
It might also be useful if we had a rough outline of the session tracks before the review,
so we can rank talks per subject.
Do we have a rough sketch already?
The timing seems fine to me -- I'll try to get my ranks in in the next days.
Dan
-----Original message-----
> From: Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net>
> Sent: Wednesday 18th December 2019 10:06
> To: cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io
> Subject: [Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc] Cephalcon talk review!
>
> Oh boy, here's the spreadsheet!
>
>
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bYCepH57ZjhuE3WoFUNQLfNOL2h2ti6Kln0…
>
> I created reviewer columns like last time. Did we just rate from 0-5
> before? I can't remember. 0-5 seems reasonable?
>
> Currently the dates for this are:
>
> - speaker notifications Jan 13
> - schedule published Jan 17
>
> I would love it if we could review these and put together a schedule
> earlier. Sooner means we can publish a schedule sooner and people will
> know what they are signing up for when they buy tickets and travel etc.
> The challenges is the holidays. I'm going to be out Dec 26 - Jan 10, but
>
> I am going to try to do my reviews before that, and I can make time for a
>
> planning call or two the first week of Jan... or we can try to start the
> discussion over email. If nothing else we can probably get the schedule
> up by the 15th (W) instead of 17th (Fri) maybe?
>
> The other thing we need to start thinking about is keynotes. We should be
>
> on the looking for talk proposals that we can simply elevate to a keynote,
>
> or think about speakers that we could invite.
>
> Currently, the PC is
>
> - Dan (CERN)
> - Josh (RH)
> - Lars (SUSE)
> - Matias (WD)
> - Neha (RH)
> - Patrick (RH)
> - Sage (RH)
>
> I asked Florian to help again and he said no. Is there anyone else we
> should invite?
>
> Thanks!
> sage
> _______________________________________________
> Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc mailing list -- cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc-leave(a)ceph.io
>
20 Dec
20 Dec
1:59 p.m.
New subject: Cephalcon talk review!
We are currently planning 3 tracks. If we find we really want more talks,
then we could possibly go back to 4, but it'll cost more. Let's see where
we end up.
As for how to organize the tracks... I'm not sure. Some of the general
categories I have in my head are:
- crimson stuff
- roadmap stuff (new features we want to talk to users about)
- user talks (experiences runnign ceph at scale etc)
- developer-focused talks. some of these might be better suited for
the Tuesday developer summit if they are really just trying to start a
conversation.
- ops stuff. kubernetes, rook, deployment tools, etc.
- tutorial.. there's a rook tutorial proposal (this time from Microsoft
and SK Telecom)
?
I added a red column that is supposed to add up the scores, but I can't
figure out why =sum(...) isn't working. But maybe we don't need that yet
until we have the scores in.
I hid my score column. I suggest after you finish entering your scores
you hide yours as well so that we have more independent scoring.
I added a orange keyword column that has things like "user",
"crimson",
"rgw", "cephfs", "tuning", etc. Feel free to update/adjust
that.. I
wasn't very careful. I also was tempted to add a 'vendor' keyword for
talks from vendors (red hat, suse, intel mostly) but I couldn't tell if I
being unfair; sometime these talks come from tech sales people who don't
have much hands-on experience running real clusters. OTOH, there were a
few talks from proserv folks who have the associated premature gray hair
to prove it and I wanted to hear from them. Somehow they seemed like
they'd be less vendor-ey, but not sure how to draw the line.
There were several duplciate submissions. I marked them DUP and put a
strikeout through them.
I highlighted the submission type when it was not a normal talk (i.e.,
lightning, panel, or tutorial) so that they were easy to spot.
Happy reviewing!
sage
On Wed, 18 Dec 2019, Dan van der Ster wrote:
> It might also be useful if we had a rough outline of the session tracks before the
review, so we can rank talks per subject.
> Do we have a rough sketch already?
>
> The timing seems fine to me -- I'll try to get my ranks in in the next days.
>
> Dan
>
> -----Original message-----
> > From: Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday 18th December 2019 10:06
> > To: cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io
> > Subject: [Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc] Cephalcon talk review!
> >
> > Oh boy, here's the spreadsheet!
> >
> >
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bYCepH57ZjhuE3WoFUNQLfNOL2h2ti6Kln0…
> >
> > I created reviewer columns like last time. Did we just rate from 0-5
> > before? I can't remember. 0-5 seems reasonable?
> >
> > Currently the dates for this are:
> >
> > - speaker notifications Jan 13
> > - schedule published Jan 17
> >
> > I would love it if we could review these and put together a schedule
> > earlier. Sooner means we can publish a schedule sooner and people will
> > know what they are signing up for when they buy tickets and travel etc.
> > The challenges is the holidays. I'm going to be out Dec 26 - Jan 10, but
> >
> > I am going to try to do my reviews before that, and I can make time for a
> >
> > planning call or two the first week of Jan... or we can try to start the
> > discussion over email. If nothing else we can probably get the schedule
> > up by the 15th (W) instead of 17th (Fri) maybe?
> >
> > The other thing we need to start thinking about is keynotes. We should be
> >
> > on the looking for talk proposals that we can simply elevate to a keynote,
> >
> > or think about speakers that we could invite.
> >
> > Currently, the PC is
> >
> > - Dan (CERN)
> > - Josh (RH)
> > - Lars (SUSE)
> > - Matias (WD)
> > - Neha (RH)
> > - Patrick (RH)
> > - Sage (RH)
> >
> > I asked Florian to help again and he said no. Is there anyone else we
> > should invite?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > sage
> > _______________________________________________
> > Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc mailing list -- cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io
> > To unsubscribe send an email to cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc-leave(a)ceph.io
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc mailing list -- cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc-leave(a)ceph.io
>
>
2 Jan
2 Jan
5:35 a.m.
New subject: Cephalcon talk review!
There is a lot of great presentations!
We all have some relative "rating" value that we use - here is how my ratings
should be interpreted.
1 - No
2 - Negative
3 - Good - Looking for a tie-breaker
4 - Positive - Great talk
5 - Very Positive - Great talk and informational
Please note that I have a conflict with Sam Just - I love to rate his talk, unfortunately,
I'm very biased (performance-geek, NVMe, ZNS, ...). I've put the rating as C. Feel
free to change it to an appropriate value.
Happy Holidays!
Kind regards,
Matias
-----Original Message-----
From: Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net>
Sent: Friday, 20 December 2019 22.59
To: Dan van der Ster <daniel.vanderster(a)cern.ch>
Cc: cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io
Subject: [Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc] Re: Cephalcon talk review!
We are currently planning 3 tracks. If we find we really want more talks, then we could
possibly go back to 4, but it'll cost more. Let's see where we end up.
As for how to organize the tracks... I'm not sure. Some of the general categories I
have in my head are:
- crimson stuff
- roadmap stuff (new features we want to talk to users about)
- user talks (experiences runnign ceph at scale etc)
- developer-focused talks. some of these might be better suited for the Tuesday developer
summit if they are really just trying to start a conversation.
- ops stuff. kubernetes, rook, deployment tools, etc.
- tutorial.. there's a rook tutorial proposal (this time from Microsoft and SK
Telecom) ?
I added a red column that is supposed to add up the scores, but I can't figure out why
=sum(...) isn't working. But maybe we don't need that yet until we have the
scores in.
I hid my score column. I suggest after you finish entering your scores you hide yours as
well so that we have more independent scoring.
I added a orange keyword column that has things like "user",
"crimson", "rgw", "cephfs", "tuning", etc. Feel
free to update/adjust that.. I wasn't very careful. I also was tempted to add a
'vendor' keyword for talks from vendors (red hat, suse, intel mostly) but I
couldn't tell if I being unfair; sometime these talks come from tech sales people who
don't have much hands-on experience running real clusters. OTOH, there were a few
talks from proserv folks who have the associated premature gray hair to prove it and I
wanted to hear from them. Somehow they seemed like they'd be less vendor-ey, but not
sure how to draw the line.
There were several duplciate submissions. I marked them DUP and put a strikeout through
them.
I highlighted the submission type when it was not a normal talk (i.e., lightning, panel,
or tutorial) so that they were easy to spot.
Happy reviewing!
sage
On Wed, 18 Dec 2019, Dan van der Ster wrote:
It might also be useful if we had a rough outline of
the session tracks before the review, so we can rank talks per subject.
Do we have a rough sketch already?
The timing seems fine to me -- I'll try to get my ranks in in the next days.
Dan
-----Original message-----
_______________________________________________
Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc mailing list -- cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io To unsubscribe
send an email to cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc-leave(a)ceph.io
From: Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net>
Sent: Wednesday 18th December 2019 10:06
To: cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io
Subject: [Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc] Cephalcon talk review!
Oh boy, here's the spreadsheet!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bYCepH57ZjhuE3WoFUNQLfNOL2h2
ti6Kln0x_vWPrik/edit?usp=sharing
I created reviewer columns like last time. Did we just rate from
0-5 before? I can't remember. 0-5 seems reasonable?
Currently the dates for this are:
- speaker notifications Jan 13
- schedule published Jan 17
I would love it if we could review these and put together a schedule
earlier. Sooner means we can publish a schedule sooner and people
will know what they are signing up for when they buy tickets and travel etc.
The challenges is the holidays. I'm going to be out Dec 26 - Jan
10, but
I am going to try to do my reviews before that, and I can make time
for a
planning call or two the first week of Jan... or we can try to start
the discussion over email. If nothing else we can probably get the
schedule up by the 15th (W) instead of 17th (Fri) maybe?
The other thing we need to start thinking about is keynotes. We
should be
on the looking for talk proposals that we can simply elevate to a
keynote,
or think about speakers that we could invite.
Currently, the PC is
- Dan (CERN)
- Josh (RH)
- Lars (SUSE)
- Matias (WD)
- Neha (RH)
- Patrick (RH)
- Sage (RH)
I asked Florian to help again and he said no. Is there anyone else
we should invite?
Thanks!
sage
_______________________________________________
Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc mailing list --
cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to
cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc-leave(a)ceph.io
_______________________________________________
Cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc mailing list --
cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc(a)ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to
cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc-leave(a)ceph.io
6 Jan
6 Jan
6:34 a.m.
New subject: Cephalcon talk review!
On 2019-12-20T21:59:12, Sage Weil <sage(a)newdream.net> wrote:
I added a red column that is supposed to add up the
scores, but I can't
figure out why =sum(...) isn't working. But maybe we don't need that yet
until we have the scores in.
The fields were formatted as "plain text" and thus SUM took all their
values as 0.
I've changed that to "number" now and converted the 3/4 and other
comments (which then show up as 384765 and other funny values) to things
like 3.5 etc.
On the pivot sheet you can also see how many talks we currently have at
a given total score, and how many talks we'd end up with in the program
if we picked a given threshold score (barring any other considerations).
--
Architect SDS, Distinguished Engineer
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, MD: Felix Imendörffer, HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg)
"Architects should open possibilities and not determine everything." (Ueli
Zbinden)
1570
days inactive
1589
days old
cephalocon-seoul-2020-pc@ceph.io
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Dan van der Ster -
Lars Marowsky-Bree -
Matias Bjorling -
Sage Weil