From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Michael J Gruber Subject: Re: The GitTogether Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:17:00 +0200 Message-ID: <5016894C.7020907@drmicha.warpmail.net> References: <87k3xpe8bz.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> <50155CD9.6060702@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Thomas Rast , Scott Chacon , git list , Jeff King , Junio C Hamano , Shawn Pearce To: Jens Lehmann X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 30 15:17:18 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SvpqX-0007xY-Hf for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 15:17:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754171Ab2G3NRH (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:17:07 -0400 Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:39518 "EHLO out1-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754097Ab2G3NRD (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:17:03 -0400 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.42]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6675A207D3; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:17:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from frontend1.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.160]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:17:02 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=smtpout; bh=5kosRKRQwYK5L5Zpgnz+n2 Xb9Wo=; b=laiBdz21WOudx7csLRDmuAbIJ9TO6VisVORBM7YX1QFe694yLMynLA AeFG5xHlPz8VISjlHu3/YtGPubPeuIYxyn7zytQ9GIqNZbd5Tl7FOkFf56rp1oIk gqyLBWCVKDF3ZGYkbUoNQWhq8epi6WsOF8JVVB4lI/J+Ed9sy7Lbw= X-Sasl-enc: tWfp8GRiCdr8cVTpauPeohgVHj+B3cCe+Evi/nkxGqm6 1343654222 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [130.75.46.56]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 5A4B78E0152; Mon, 30 Jul 2012 09:17:01 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120717 Thunderbird/14.0 In-Reply-To: <50155CD9.6060702@web.de> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jens Lehmann venit, vidit, dixit 29.07.2012 17:55: > Am 27.07.2012 13:45, schrieb Thomas Rast: >> Scott Chacon writes: >> >>> GitHub would like to volunteer to organize and pay for these events >>> this year. I would like to hold the developer-centric one in Berlin >>> in early October Winter term classes start 10/15. Before 10/15 it will be easier to book university rooms if we need that. >> >> Yay, Berlin! I would be glad to join there; I would probably not have >> the time and resources to travel to SF this year. > > Same here. Same. Do we have contacts regarding (un)conference rooms in Berlin already? I might be able to ask around. > >>> For those of you who *have* been to a GitTogether, what did you find >>> useful and/or useless about it? What did you get out of it and would >>> like to see again? For those of you who have never been, what do you >>> think would be useful? I was thinking for both of them to have a >>> combination of short prepared talks, lightning/unconference style >>> talks and general discussion / breakout sessions. >> >> I was at the 2010 GitTogether in Mountain View. I really liked the >> unconference format, and the way Shawn and Junio used it: just using the >> topic stickers as a sort of todo-list, not actually fixing any schedule >> in advance. Oddly enough we also managed to avoid the usual consequence >> of open-ended discussions: getting stuck endlessly on an absolutely >> insignificant point. > > Yup, the unconference format with both common and breakout sessions > worked really well. > >> I think the discussions were very productive. I would love to do more >> hacking than we managed in 2010, but I realize that this is not possible >> if we just meet for 2-3 days. Perhaps one option would be to plan for >> 1-2 days of hacking after the discussion rounds, so that the interested >> people can stay a bit longer? > > I really like that idea and would vote for 3-4 days (maybe including a > weekend for those of us who have to take a leave from work ;-). >