Hide minor edits - Show changes to markup
This page is for miscellaneous ideas to try out at pyTexas. Actual discussion is on the email list texas@python.org.
For concrete plans, see Schedule2009.
Please help us tailor the talks and sprints to your interests. Below you can list subjects that interest you or attach your name to any subjects that are already there.
Each track (Beginner and Experienced) includes formal talks, lightning talks, coding sprints, and PythonLabs. Open spaces are also on the schedule, to allow for 'unconference' style talks or discussions. For the formal talks, proposals are underway, see TalkProposals.
Meals will not be served at the venue; we'll walk to nearby restaurants for meals; see MealGatherings.
See Schedule2009
We have some specific talks and activities getting documented under Schedule2009 and TalkProposals. Each track (Beginner and Experienced) includes formal talks, open spaces, lightning talks, social meetings for meals, sprints, and PythonLabs.
Each track (Beginner and Experienced) includes formal talks, lightning talks, coding sprints, and PythonLabs. Open spaces are also on the schedule, to allow for 'unconference' style talks or discussions. For the formal talks, proposals are underway, see TalkProposals.
Meals will not be served at the venue; we'll walk to nearby restaurants for meals; see MealGatherings.
Martin Taylor said:
These "unconferences" sound very much like the Austin Workshop on Test Automation (AWTA) conferences that I have attended: http://awta.wikispaces.com/. The AWTA model is based on a process developed by Cem Kaner and Brian Lawrence for another workshop, the Los Altos Workshop on Software Testing (LAWST): http://www.kaner.com/lawst.htm. Some of the LAWST approaches to presentations and discussions were also used at the first Conference of the Association for Software Testing (CAST) last summer in Indianapolis (http://www.associationforsoftwaretesting.org/conference/cast2006/index.html). Organizers and attendees of PyCamp (or whatever name gets picked) might take a look at the LAWST model for futher ideas on user-driven conferences. I particularly like their way of moderating the discussion following a presentation as it allows for in depth Q&A and discussion that goes where the attendees choose and for how long they choose.
Robin Friedrich replies:
This does have some very good approaches. I do want to make sure we provide sufficient time for post presentation discussions. The Pycons are scheduled so tightly with little time for followups there's a bit of an inhibitor. On the other hand I see cases where people want to pursue topics beyond the interest level of the audience. I suggest having reserved block time for followup discussions for topics that would have blown the session schedule. The session facilitator is going to have to make the call on time. We definitely don't want to have people scheduled to talk find that their time slot's been cut into.
We have some specific talks and activities getting documented under Schedule2009 and TalkProposals. Each track (Beginner and Experienced) includes formal talks, open spaces, lightning talks, social meetings for meals, sprints, and PythonLabs.
Martin Taylor said:
These "unconferences" sound very much like the Austin Workshop on Test Automation (AWTA) conferences that I have attended: http://awta.wikispaces.com/. The AWTA model is based on a process developed by Cem Kaner and Brian Lawrence for another workshop, the Los Altos Workshop on Software Testing (LAWST): http://www.kaner.com/lawst.htm. Some of the LAWST approaches to presentations and discussions were also used at the first Conference of the Association for Software Testing (CAST) last summer in Indianapolis (http://www.associationforsoftwaretesting.org/conference/cast2006/index.html). Organizers and attendees of PyCamp (or whatever name gets picked) might take a look at the LAWST model for futher ideas on user-driven conferences. I particularly like their way of moderating the discussion following a presentation as it allows for in depth Q&A and discussion that goes where the attendees choose and for how long they choose.
Robin Friedrich replies:
This does have some very good approaches. I do want to make sure we provide sufficient time for post presentation discussions. The Pycons are scheduled so tightly with little time for followups there's a bit of an inhibitor. On the other hand I see cases where people want to pursue topics beyond the interest level of the audience. I suggest having reserved block time for followup discussions for topics that would have blown the session schedule. The session facilitator is going to have to make the call on time. We definitely don't want to have people scheduled to talk find that their time slot's been cut into.
David Dannemiller said:
What happened to the session on Enthought?
What happened to the session on EnThought?
(David Dannemiller)
David Dannemiller said:
What happened to the session on Enthought?
What happened to the session on EnThought?
(David Dannemiller)
Personally, I despise repeating myself. I'd prefer regular lightning talks. -Dean
I'd prefer regular lightning talks so I don't have to repeat myself. -Dean
Personally, I despise repeating myself. I'd prefer regular lightning talks. -Dean
Martin Taylor said:
These "unconferences" sound very much like the Austin Workshop on Test Automation (AWTA) conferences that I have attended: http://awta.wikispaces.com/. The AWTA model is based on a process developed by Cem Kaner and Brian Lawrence for another workshop, the Los Altos Workshop on Software Testing (LAWST): http://www.kaner.com/lawst.htm. Some of the LAWST approaches to presentations and discussions were also used at the first Conference of the Association for Software Testing (CAST) last summer in Indianapolis (http://www.associationforsoftwaretesting.org/conference/cast2006/index.html). Organizers and attendees of PyCamp (or whatever name gets picked) might take a look at the LAWST model for futher ideas on user-driven conferences. I particularly like their way of moderating the discussion following a presentation as it allows for in depth Q&A and discussion that goes where the attendees choose and for how long they choose.
Robin Friedrich replies:
This does have some very good approaches. I do want to make sure we provide sufficient time for post presentation discussions. The Pycons are scheduled so tightly with little time for followups there's a bit of an inhibitor. On the other hand I see cases where people want to pursue topics beyond the interest level of the audience. I suggest having reserved block time for followup discussions for topics that would have blown the session schedule. The session facilitator is going to have to make the call on time. We definitely don't want to have people scheduled to talk find that their time slot's been cut into.
Interesting. Let's do this in the atrium area at the end of the unconference. We can photograph each anthrospectrograph from the second floor and compile the results on the web site. Oh now that's geeky! -RKF
I don't know. Sounds like a drinking game to me. Not that there's anything wrong with that! -RKF
Speedgeeking is like lightning talks in parallel. You round up N speakers, who will have 4 minutes for their talk; each speaker is placed at a station. The audience is divided into N groups, and the groups rotate around the room so that they see all the talks; when the four minutes are up, they *must move on. Speakers therefore deliver their talk N times.
Speedgeeking is like lightning talks in parallel. You round up N speakers, who will have 4 minutes for their talk; each speaker is placed at a station. The audience is divided into N groups, and the groups rotate around the room so that they see all the talks; when the four minutes are up, they must move on. Speakers therefore deliver their talk N times.
Speedgeeking is like lightning talks in parallel. You round up N speakers, who will have 4 minutes for their talk; each speaker is placed at a station. The audience is divided into N groups, and the groups rotate around the room so that they see all the talks; when the four minutes are up, they *must move on. Speakers therefore deliver their talk N times.
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like BeeblebroxNetGila.
We definitely need a skin -- and the one you suggested looks very nice -- other ideas? -JeffRush
Here's how it works. Tape out a line the length of the room. One end is "strongly agree", the other is "strongly disagree". The facilitator then reads a question, and everyone moves to the place on the line that represents their answer. Some of the questions could be:
* the Python language is changing too fast * there should be fewer web frameworks * ???
Everyone stands for a bit while the facilitator leads a discussion. In the discussion it's easy to represent both sides, because you can ask people at either end to explain their position, and you can also ask people in the middle.
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like BeeblebroxNetGila.
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like BeeblebroxNetGila.
We definitely need a skin -- and the one you suggested looks very nice -- other ideas? -JeffRush
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like BeeblebroxNetGila
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like BeeblebroxNetGila.
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like BeeblebroxNetGila
How about we pick a nice theme for this site from the pmwiki skins provided? (See link on the left.) I kinda like