I did the schedule, so let me explain:

> Some really interesting talks were scheduled in the Opening
> Hours or in the After Hours which not really many people attended.

If you look at the schedule, there is no slot left in Core days. The alternative was rejecting the talks that didn’t fit in Core. How would have that been better?

> On the core days, some important talks happened at the same time

Guess what? No matter how you lay the talks out, there exists at least one people who finds it suboptimal. In fact, for myself, there was more than one talk I wanted to attend for any given timeslice during the Core days. It’s just impossible to avoid that in any way other than totally giving up on parallel talks. Unfortunately that means rejecting most of the proposals.

I think the schedule was in fact quite decent. You may notice that on the first two Core days, there’s three tracks going on: “Embedded Devices”, “Multimedia”, and “GNOME in the Cloud”. And for each of those tracks, no two talks are scheduled in parallel. The last Core day has “Debugging and Tracing” and a “Infrastructure” tracks going on.

> I don’t think it’s a good idea to schedule anything against the Lightning talks.

Sure, I don’t like it either. But that just meant 4 fewer slots for the Core days.

> Anyway, I would love if some experienced GNOME people could
> check the schedule for such conflicts next year.

Many such people did, and many talks where moved around before we arrived at the current one. You should trying scheduling one day and see how impossible it is to make everyone happy.

Anyway, for next year, I believe we are ready to go to four Core days, and that gives us a bit more flexibility…

Cheers,

behdad

My big idea for GNOME 3 is making a GNOME desktop that does what you want to! It really shouldn’t be too hard to fall back to sensible defaults or make GUI applications for advanced users’ configuration needs.

Thanks