Re: Thoughts on KubeCon
|
Barker, Daniel <drbarker@...>
DevOps Enterprise Summit asks about a lot of transformation related details. We may want to do that as well since many of the end-users are likely using these tools to help move their legacy infrastructure in unique and challenging ways. They’re likely using a lot of the tools in ways that others will appreciate and mimic but may not be what the vendor intended.
Dan Barker Chief Architect National Association of Insurance Commissioners 1100 Walnut St. Suite 1500 Kansas City, MO 64106 816-783-8669
From: cncf-toc@... <cncf-toc@...>
On Behalf Of Yuan Chen
I second that. As someone who has had a long history with CS academic conferences (as both a reviewer and author), I was really surprised by the fact that we only needed to write a very short abstract (up to 900 characters)! I was wondering how a reviewer could make a decision based on such limited information.
Also, as the effort required to write a proposal was not that much, there were a larger number of submissions. To me, the quality or outcome (those accepted proposals) should matter most, not the number of submissions.
Interestingly, we were asked to provide a lot of information about our background and experience. I couldn’t help thinking the reviewers care more about an author’s background and experience than the submission itself.
Would it be helpful to try something like an extended abstract, which can provide more information and technical content? We can use a template (e.g., problem statement, solution and results), maybe 1-2 pages.
Also, I would like to have received feedbacks on my submissions.
Thanks,
-Yuan
Principal Architect, Infrastructure JD.com Silicon Valley R&D Center
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Bob Wise <bob@...>
Since the number of submissions is really high, might be ok to require a more in-depth submission to provide enough context for the double-blind assessment. Fewer but better submissions seems like it would be a fine tradeoff.
On Wed, Oct 3, 2018 at 5:36 PM Alena Prokharchyk <alena@...> wrote:
----------------------------------------- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any attachments are from the NAIC and are intended only for the addressee. Information contained herein is confidential, and may be privileged or exempt from disclosure pursuant to applicable federal or state law. This message is not intended as a waiver of the confidential, privileged or exempted status of the information transmitted. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error by e-mail or by forwarding it to the NAIC Service Desk at help@.... |
|
|
|