tim.bowden at westnet.com.au
Sun Oct 12 14:38:41 EDT 2008
On Sun, 2008-10-12 at 11:11 -0700, Dave Patton wrote:
> In light of the Code Sprint discussions, I thought
> I'd raise the issue of Workshops, which I think is
> much more important to get a handle on than the
> Code Sprint. It certainly needs to be sorted out
> much sooner than the Code Sprint.
> At this point, I'm only talking "Workshops".
> Not "Labs".
To my mind the difference is a bit artificial. In essence one is just a
half length version of the other. Both seem to me to be crowd pullers
(essentially short and cheap training exercises). Do we really need to
> However, that assumes we stick with
> Workshops as 1/2 day, and Labs as 90 minutes,
> and that Workshops are an extra-charge item and
> that Labs (if there are Labs, which is a separate
> (please) discussion) are part of the conference
> program(i.e. like Presentations).
> I'm thinking that if we have some consensus on this
> list, then we could ask for input on OSGeo-Discuss.
> What is the timeframe for holding Workshops?
> Single day?
So far that's all we have looked at doing. We could also offer Monday
if the prices v costs work out. We must remember though those coming
from Nth America will have absolutely horrid travel times crossing the
date line and will mostly miss Monday content if they don't leave home
before Saturday. On balance I'd be tempted to leave Monday alone apart
from an ice breaker in the evening.
> Daytime only, or Evening Workshops as well?
Daytime only. Evenings are way too useful for social activities (which
to me represent a significant portion of the value of the conf.
> How many Workshop slots should there be?
> 3-hour slots?
Yes. We will have enough material offered to run with a full set of 3
hour sessions of past experience is anything to go by.
> One set in the morning, one set in the afternoon?
> How many simultaneous slots?(e.g. 6 at once, like
> Victoria, making for a total of 12 Workshops)?
As many as we think we can fill and find facilities for (which may be 12
total anyway). It should be prices as revenue positive imho, so we
shouldn't be limited in that respect. How many proposed workshops got
turned down for Victoria?
> Any specific restrictions?
> Only Workshops that haven't been delivered before?
> Only content that is 100% Open Source?
If delegates are using the code, it should be under an OSI license. The
sticky bits come at the margin of course. What if a mapguide workshop
wants to use some Autodesk proprietary utilities around the edges for
example. How should we handle that? We need to be careful we don't
slide down that slippery slope...
> Must be 'hands on'.
> Only use provided PCs(no "bring your own laptop")?
Assuming we can get the workshops fitted out with standarised PC's, we
should go with that. Reduces complications which will be important
given the limited time for each one. If a delegate wants to use their
own laptop anyway, that's on their head and the presenter would be well
within their rights to ignore any issues resulting.
> Audience balance for the Workshops?
> How many aimed at "beginners"?
> How many aimed at "intermediate"?
> How many aimed at "advanced"?
> How many aimed at "developers"?
Lets see what we're offered and then decide, but a "good" mix would be
preferable, for whatever value of good works :-)
> Incremental Registration Cost for Workshop attendance?
> Aim to break even?
> Aim to make X profit?
Definitely profit. It's training at well below the normal rates, and is
a big draw card. I can't see any reason not to take advantage of this
to support the community that produced the software.
> There are probably more things to consider,
> but you get the idea.
Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you recognize a mistake
when you make it again.
More information about the Foss4g2009