Re: [cdt-dev] EclipseCon presentations

[Douglas Schaefer <dschaefe@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Yes, I think we need at least a couple of hours for the BOF. We went over 
two hours last year.

This year, I'd like to see the topics focus on where we need to evolve the 
CDT and make the BOF a working meeting. We could walk through each of the 
major areas of the CDT, discuss the successes and issues we are seeing in 
those areas, and propose action plans on how to get the issues addressed. 
We have a few things to seed these discussions such as Pierre's remote 
systems work. I think we'll also find that the things we need to apply the 
CDT to one industry are very similar to things needed in other industries 
(in this case I'm thinking Embedded versus Enterprise/Server). We'll have 
to figure out an agenda so that if we do need 2 BOFs, we can make one or 
the other optional for people.

The other thing I'd encourage is setting up separate informal meetings 
with people you'd like to meet. We ended up in a few of them last year and 
found them almost the most valuable part of the trip. I'm sure there will 
be a few tables around for talks over various beverages :_)

Doug Schaefer, IBM's Technical Lead, Eclipse CDT
Ottawa Lab, IBM Canada, Rational Software Division



Pierre-Alexandre Masse <pmasse@xxxxxxxxxx> 
Sent by: cdt-dev-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx
11/18/2004 05:43 PM
Please respond to
cdt-dev


To
cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc

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