RE: [cdt-dev] EclipseCon presentations

[Sebastien Marineau <sebastien@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Pierre-Alexandre,

Sounds good -- this was also discussed separately through email with Sumit
(HP) and Pierre-Alexandre. What we will suggest, then, is 2 BOFs, the first
a general CDT BOF (inc. managed make); the second we can maybe call "remote
development BOF", which would include TI, HP, MVista.

How does that sound? TI?

Thanks,

Sebastien

> -----Original Message-----
> From: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Pierre-Alexandre Masse
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 5:43 PM
> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] EclipseCon presentations
> 
> Hi,
> 
> 
> On the BOFs matter, I prefer the first option (2 BOFs). All in one would
> be probably too many subjects to allow any discussion to really start
> (assuming a BOF is supposed to last 1 hour).
> 
> We (MontaVista) apply for a talk on Remote System Framework, that I
> propose to cancel and join to TI in the second BOFs, if it is ok with TI
> folks and others.
> 
> Thoughts? comments?
> 
> Pierre-Alexandre
> 
> Sebastien Marineau wrote:
> 
> > Hi folks,
> >
> >
> >
> > This is a follow-up to the discussions we had on the conf. call with
> > respect to presentation slots (and BOFs) on CDT at EclipseCon. I've
> > spoken with the conference organizers, and expressed our eagerness to
> > do multiple sessions on CDT. Unfortunately, I don't think there are
> > enough speaking slots to accommodate all talks (frankly, they were
> > surprised we wanted to do more than 1 J). What they have suggested is
> > that CDT could present 2 or 3 talks (2 for sure, maybe 3), along with
> > one BOF. Based on that, I'd like to come up with a proposal that
> > allows everyone to participate.
> >
> >
> >
> > Here's a couple of suggestions of how we could proceed:
> >
> >
> >
> > Talks:
> >
> >
> >
> >    1. CDT state of the world - where we are at, what's ahead, etc (QNX)
> >    2. Providing a development environment for Linux - CDT, oprofile,
> >       RPM plugins (we could try to pass this as a non-CDT talk) (Redhat)
> >    3. Design and implementation of a high-performance C/C++ code
> >       parser under eclipse - challenges, lessons learned, etc (IBM)
> >    4. Timesys had various ideas on presentations. Maybe there is some
> >       angle we can take that is non-CDT specific?
> >
> >
> >
> > BOF:
> >
> >
> >
> > The topics that have been suggested for discussions are as follows:
> >
> > 1.   General CDT BOF (general discussions, similar to last year)
> >
> >    2. Intel managed build discussion
> >    3. TI: deeply embedded development and debugging with Eclipse and CDT
> >
> >
> >
> > I see a couple of options. The first is for us to do #1 and #2 in a
> > CDT BOF (quite reasonable, the topics fit well together), and try to
> > get a second BOF for embedded debugging which TI would drive (#3).
> > This could turn into a more general BOF, either on CDT debugging, or
> > on Eclipse for deeply embedded apps. Maybe we could get others to
> > participate (Altera, Tensilica, Intel?).
> >
> >
> >
> > The second option is to include all three topics into a single CDT BOF.
> >
> >
> >
> > In any case, I'm looking for people's opinions on this. I promised the
> > EclipseCon organizers I'd get them a proposal, along with rough
> > abstracts before the end of the week. I'll obviously need some help
> > with the abstracts, especially for the IBM and Redhat talks.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks a lot,
> >
> >
> >
> > Sebastien
> >
> _______________________________________________
> cdt-dev mailing list
> cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cdt-dev