From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mark Brown Subject: Re: Plumbers: Please split audio topics into separate sessions Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 23:24:17 +0100 Message-ID: <20120806222417.GF26698@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> References: <50201664.7000804@canonical.com> <50202500.5060607@canonical.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (opensource.wolfsonmicro.com [80.75.67.52]) by alsa0.perex.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13138265E19 for ; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 23:54:32 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <50202500.5060607@canonical.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org Sender: alsa-devel-bounces@alsa-project.org To: David Henningsson Cc: Takashi Iwai , "alsa-devel@alsa-project.org" List-Id: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 10:11:44PM +0200, David Henningsson wrote: > On 08/06/2012 09:29 PM, Takashi Iwai wrote: >> Well, as already announced, each topic was planned to be about 20 >> minutes, so I don't think we need to extend session time. > Judging from our last experience, where we had a two-hour session on > Sunday and then had to reschedule on Wednesday for two more hours, and > yet had to cancel the topic I was about to introduce, because everybody > was tired (and waiting for lunch), I certainly beg to differ! Hrm? Was this Plumbers or the BoF in Prague last year? >> Of course, it's possible to ask more slots, if you are sure that one >> topic would need really 40 minutes discussions. > It's the discussions that take time. On the other hand if we don't have much concrete to discuss then it can end up being too long. I guess this is one of the concerns I have with having lots of sessions - it means we've split topics up and have less play to manage time overall, it means we either cover less or take more time. The flexibility for attendees is good, though - have to see how the tradeoffs work. > Also all of the 45 minutes is not effective discussion/presentation > time: Assume that we first wait 5 minutes for all people to appear, then > we have 5 minutes presentation and 15 - 20 minutes discussion for the > first topic, then 5 minutes are spent fiddling with the projector to > show the slides for the second topic...and suddenly there is just a few > minutes left for discussion of the second topic. This is a bit of a concern, yes. > Also; we fly across half the world to get there, to spend just a few > minutes talking? Better have some margins. Maybe some session will end > early, but will it hurt? No. If we miss a topic, or have to cut it short > without a conclusion, will it hurt? Yes. Perhaps the best thing is to have an additional session for overrun rather than plan on everything being 45 minutes long?