11:12 p.m.
I've been wondering if the capacity of the breakout sessions on days
two and three of the workshop is greater than that of the big room on
the first day, i.e., >80?
If so, maybe there are ways we can have more people for the workshop
and deal with the room overflow on the first day?
As long as we don't have more people than can fit in all of the rooms
combined, we'll have room for everyone just not in one room.
So what if we simulcasted the main room session in to smaller side
rooms?
In the end, how these events fill rooms is limited by the Fire
Marshall. There is a max capacity under each seating condition.
But my thinking is, I'd be willing to give up my chair to get just one
more developer in to that seat.
In fact, I'd much rather be on my feet making a live webcast of the
entire first day happen than occupying a useful chair!
Is there some merit in this idea? Anything useful?
- Karsten
--
name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership
uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org
gpg: AD0E0C41
3:11 a.m.
----- Original Message -----
I've been wondering if the capacity of the breakout sessions on
days
two and three of the workshop is greater than that of the big room on
the first day, i.e., >80?
If so, maybe there are ways we can have more people for the workshop
and deal with the room overflow on the first day?
As long as we don't have more people than can fit in all of the rooms
combined, we'll have room for everyone just not in one room.
So what if we simulcasted the main room session in to smaller side
rooms?
In the end, how these events fill rooms is limited by the Fire
Marshall. There is a max capacity under each seating condition.
But my thinking is, I'd be willing to give up my chair to get just
one
more developer in to that seat.
In fact, I'd much rather be on my feet making a live webcast of the
entire first day happen than occupying a useful chair!
Is there some merit in this idea? Anything useful?
Just from tlv we've got over 10 people coming, most of whom can sit out of most
technical talks (or will be giving talks / workshops). In fact we'll probably use any
free time to go on working on the following sessions.
- Karsten
--
name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership
uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org
gpg: AD0E0C41
_______________________________________________
Project-planning mailing list
Project-planning(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
8:28 a.m.
no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will
become lectures and non-productive for
the kick-off workshop.
Carl.
On 10/07/2011 12:12 AM, Karsten Wade wrote:
I've been wondering if the capacity of the breakout sessions on
days
two and three of the workshop is greater than that of the big room on
the first day, i.e., >80?
If so, maybe there are ways we can have more people for the workshop
and deal with the room overflow on the first day?
As long as we don't have more people than can fit in all of the rooms
combined, we'll have room for everyone just not in one room.
So what if we simulcasted the main room session in to smaller side
rooms?
In the end, how these events fill rooms is limited by the Fire
Marshall. There is a max capacity under each seating condition.
But my thinking is, I'd be willing to give up my chair to get just one
more developer in to that seat.
In fact, I'd much rather be on my feet making a live webcast of the
entire first day happen than occupying a useful chair!
Is there some merit in this idea? Anything useful?
- Karsten
_______________________________________________
Project-planning mailing list
Project-planning(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
1:23 p.m.
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will
become lectures and non-productive for
the kick-off workshop.
OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out sessions
as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me.
So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few of
those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with
placeholder owners, no worries.)
Here's a quick plan, does this work?
1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day
in a safe and legal way.
2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be on
a wait list.
3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us
write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest, sorry
for those who are missing it, more to come.
4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who
show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt
Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December.
- Karsten
--
name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership
uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org
gpg: AD0E0C41
1:46 p.m.
On 10/07/2011 01:23 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
> no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will
> become lectures and non-productive for
> the kick-off workshop.
OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out sessions
as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me.
So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few of
those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with
placeholder owners, no worries.)
Here's a quick plan, does this work?
1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day
in a safe and legal way.
2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be on
a wait list.
3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us
write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest, sorry
for those who are missing it, more to come.
4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who
show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt
Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December.
For working sessions, would it be possible to stream audio either via a
conference call or through an audio streaming service?
At UDSes, they tend to project an IRC session and use group note taking software
in order to let people remotely participate. Perhaps Dustin knows some more of
the specifics on the technologies used.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
- Karsten
_______________________________________________
Project-planning mailing list
Project-planning(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
4:20 p.m.
----- Original Message -----
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>
> no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will
> become lectures and non-productive for
> the kick-off workshop.
OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out
sessions
as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me.
So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few
of
those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with
placeholder owners, no worries.)
Do we have any estimate on how many of the rsvps won't show up in the end?
Here's a quick plan, does this work?
1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day
in a safe and legal way.
2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be
on
a wait list.
3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us
write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest,
sorry
for those who are missing it, more to come.
4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who
show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt
Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December.
- Karsten
--
name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener
team: Red Hat Community Architecture & Leadership
uri: http://communityleadershipteam.org
http://TheOpenSourceWay.org
gpg: AD0E0C41
_______________________________________________
Project-planning mailing list
Project-planning(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/project-planning
1:45 p.m.
On 10/07/2011 02:23 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 09:28:17AM -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
> no, we need to cap around 80. If we get too large the sessions will
> become lectures and non-productive for
> the kick-off workshop.
OK, I see, so your vision of size extends in to the break-out sessions
as dividing up one reasonably-sized-pool. Makes sense to me.
So we're effectively at 80 people on the RSVP list, with just a few of
those placeholders to be filled. (I'm in communication with
placeholder owners, no worries.)
Here's a quick plan, does this work?
1. At 80 to 85 we draw the line - we can support 85 on the first day
in a safe and legal way.
2. Fix website content to say we're full but RSVP if you want to be on
a wait list.
3. We do a quick post on Twitter etc. that we're full. Some of us
write in our blogs that this happened, good sign of interest, sorry
for those who are missing it, more to come.
4. Have some simple, "How to stay involved" information for folks who
show interest. For example, I'm going to start a monthly oVirt
Bay Area Meetup targeted for mid-December.
sounds good, do it at 85, as there are always a few people that can't
make it last minute.
Carl.
4596
days inactive
4599
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Anthony Liguori -
Ayal Baron -
Carl Trieloff -
Karsten Wade