BoostCon 2011 Dates and Hotel Discount (this week only!)
Hi All, BoostCon #4 was a resounding success, with 95 registrants—attendance holding steady in the face of a poor economy—and nothing but smiles all ’round. One participant was heard to say “after last year, I thought about not coming because I was sure nothing could possibly be cooler that experience, but this is even better.” I'll have more to say about the event soon, but for now a couple important details about next year: 1. Next year, BoostCon is scheduled a week later: May 15-20, 2011 which avoids a conflict with Mother's Day, a perennial issue for some attendees… and is a bit less likely to bring us snow ;-) 2. Because BoostCon has been an excellent regular customer, the Aspen Meadows is offering a $20/night discount for any Boost participant who books on or before **this Friday**, May 21 2010. After taxes, etc., that's more than a $100 savings. Use the following link to make your reservation: https://resweb.passkey.com/Resweb.do?mode=welcome_ei_new&eventID=2547965&fromResdesk=true Lastly, the Meadows wants you to know that your companies or universities are welcome back for other meetings, and requests that, if you had a good hotel experience this year, you please post positive feedback on http://tripadvisor.com. See you next year, if not before! Cheers, -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David, a couple of weeks (months ?) ago, you sent a curiosity provoking announcement about some new tool which you wanted everyone to use for boost (and other) development, suggesting that it would be unveiled at BoostCon. For the benefit of those poor fellows who couldn't make it there: Will there be a follow-up on this ? Is there anything that will affect boost development in the short-to-medium term ? I'm asking mainly because I have plans to get back to some code I have in the boost sandbox, and want to get an idea what tools to use, i.e. whether I should attempt again to get familiar with boost.build, or whether the new True Way is something different. Thanks, Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
At Tue, 18 May 2010 16:24:35 -0400, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
David,
a couple of weeks (months ?) ago, you sent a curiosity provoking announcement about some new tool which you wanted everyone to use for boost (and other) development, suggesting that it would be unveiled at BoostCon.
Ryppl. It was.
For the benefit of those poor fellows who couldn't make it there: Will there be a follow-up on this ?
You bet there will. I'm just now trying to put everything in a condition where others can help with the work :-)
Is there anything that will affect boost development in the short-to-medium term?
It's hard to say how soon Boost will make the transition, or even if it will. I'm trying assiduously not to tie the fate of Ryppl to Boost's use thereof. However, I predict that Boost *will* make that transition
I'm asking mainly because I have plans to get back to some code I have in the boost sandbox, and want to get an idea what tools to use, i.e. whether I should attempt again to get familiar with boost.build, or whether the new True Way is something different.
Heh. IMO BB hasn't been the True Way for quite some time. But of course that's just IMO. I'm going to try hard to encourage the use of CMake on Ryppl. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
AMDG David Abrahams wrote:
At Tue, 18 May 2010 16:24:35 -0400, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
I'm asking mainly because I have plans to get back to some code I have in the boost sandbox, and want to get an idea what tools to use, i.e. whether I should attempt again to get familiar with boost.build, or whether the new True Way is something different.
Heh. IMO BB hasn't been the True Way for quite some time. But of course that's just IMO.
I'm not quite sure what you mean. Boost.Build is still the official build system. Every Boost library currently has to support it, at least by the time it gets into the trunk. In Christ, Steven Watanabe
At Tue, 18 May 2010 15:25:40 -0700, Steven Watanabe wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
At Tue, 18 May 2010 16:24:35 -0400, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
I'm asking mainly because I have plans to get back to some code I have in the boost sandbox, and want to get an idea what tools to use, i.e. whether I should attempt again to get familiar with boost.build, or whether the new True Way is something different.
Heh. IMO BB hasn't been the True Way for quite some time. But of course that's just IMO.
I'm not quite sure what you mean. Boost.Build is still the official build system. Every Boost library currently has to support it, at least by the time it gets into the trunk.
All true. What I mean is that I believe it is better for Boost's health in the long run to be working with a widely-used build system that's supported by more than one or two people, and I'm going to encourage the use of CMake with Ryppl. More details to come... -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
At Tue, 18 May 2010 16:24:35 -0400, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
David,
a couple of weeks (months ?) ago, you sent a curiosity provoking announcement about some new tool which you wanted everyone to use for boost (and other) development, suggesting that it would be unveiled at BoostCon.
Ryppl. It was.
For the benefit of those poor fellows who couldn't make it there: Will there be a follow-up on this ?
You bet there will. I'm just now trying to put everything in a condition where others can help with the work :-)
Is there anything that will affect boost development in the short-to-medium term?
It's hard to say how soon Boost will make the transition, or even if it will. I'm trying assiduously not to tie the fate of Ryppl to Boost's use thereof. However, I predict that Boost *will* make that transition
I would suggest to wait with any such predictions until you can demonstrate that whatever new setup you propose can build all of boost, run all the tests, get exactly same results on those tests and further, and is actually maintained for a few releases and is actually better. I should remind about the boost-cmake project, which was announced with great noise, promoted to a state of an almost-official component, got mentioned at the top of release announcement for a certain release (*), got featured in marketing materials of certain company and then ended up being totally unmaintained. - Volodya (*) It's true that the announcement in question: http://www.boost.org/users/news/version_1_39_0 reports that boost-cmake is broken, but still it's funny that brokeness of an experimental something was deemed more important than updates in the libraries.
Vladimir Prus wrote:
(*) It's true that the announcement in question: http://www.boost.org/users/news/version_1_39_0
It's actually http://www.boost.org/users/news/version_1_40_0 - Volodya
On 5/19/2010 1:06 PM, Vladimir Prus wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
It's hard to say how soon Boost will make the transition, or even if it will. I'm trying assiduously not to tie the fate of Ryppl to Boost's use thereof. However, I predict that Boost *will* make that transition
I would suggest to wait with any such predictions until you can demonstrate that whatever new setup you propose can build all of boost, run all the tests, get exactly same results on those tests and further, and is actually maintained for a few releases and is actually better.
I should remind about the boost-cmake project, which was announced with great noise, promoted to a state of an almost-official component, got mentioned at the top of release announcement for a certain release (*), got featured in marketing materials of certain company and then ended up being totally unmaintained.
It's not totally unmaintained, but your point is a fair one and I'm surprised nobody responded. Before we could consider switching to something like ryppl and cmake, it needs to be proven *and* there needs to some folks (plural) committed to maintaining it long-term. To that end, I'm throwing my hat in the ring. I'll be moving to Boston for the summer to help Dave turn ryppl/cmake into a viable alternative. Dave and I are both here for the long-term and are deeply invested in making Boost just work. Also, KitWare has donated one man-month over the next year to helping make this happen. They'll add any features to CMake/CTest/CDash/CPack we deem necessary. -- Eric Niebler BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
Eric Niebler wrote:
It's not totally unmaintained, but your point is a fair one and I'm surprised nobody responded. Before we could consider switching to something like ryppl and cmake, it needs to be proven *and* there needs to some folks (plural) committed to maintaining it long-term. To that end, I'm throwing my hat in the ring. I'll be moving to Boston for the summer to help Dave turn ryppl/cmake into a viable alternative. Dave and I are both here for the long-term and are deeply invested in making Boost just work.
Also, KitWare has donated one man-month over the next year to helping make this happen. They'll add any features to CMake/CTest/CDash/CPack we deem necessary.
Just askign around. Can't ryppl be CVS agnostic ? or at least support stuff like Mercurial and Bazaar as an option ? It seems counterproductive to be tied to git for the distribution part. -- ___________________________________________ Joel Falcou - Assistant Professor PARALL Team - LRI - Universite Paris Sud XI Tel : (+33)1 69 15 66 35
At Mon, 24 May 2010 19:47:00 +0200, joel falcou wrote:
Just askign around. Can't ryppl be CVS agnostic ? or at least support stuff like Mercurial and Bazaar as an option ? It seems counterproductive to be tied to git for the distribution part.
Joel: 0. Cross-posting to the ryppl-dev list 1. Yes, in principle it can support those other VCSes. In fact, there's infrastructure in PIP that allows the specifics of the VCS to be abstracted away. 2. My priority is on smoothness of operation. I want all the workflows described at http://ryppl.org/workflows.html to be as painless as possible, and I'm perfectly happy to mandate the use of Git for ryppl if it is going to make the difference between “just works” and “hassle.” If you really want to use Mercurial for your own development you can always leverage hg-git (http://hg-git.github.com), and I'm sure there's something similar for bzr. 3. At the risk of alienating some people… I believe Git is going to win the DVCS wars. It has the momentum. And as truly obnoxious as Linus' remarks about other VCSes have been, I have been working with them too recently, and I am forced to agree with him. So I'm personally not interested in investing much effort in other VCSes. 4. However, if someone comes along who wants to do the work, and can make me confident that s/he'll maintain it, and can make me confident that the system won't have to sacrifice usability, well then I have no objections :^) -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
0. Cross-posting to the ryppl-dev list
Lemme register then ;)
1. Yes, in principle it can support those other VCSes. In fact, there's infrastructure in PIP that allows the specifics of the VCS to be abstracted away.
OK
2. My priority is on smoothness of operation. I want all the workflows described at http://ryppl.org/workflows.html to be as painless as possible, and I'm perfectly happy to mandate the use of Git for ryppl if it is going to make the difference between “just works” and “hassle.” If you really want to use Mercurial for your own development you can always leverage hg-git (http://hg-git.github.com), and I'm sure there's something similar for bzr.
It's fine by me. Fact is that I don't *want* to use Mercurial but my surroundings are (university, lab etc) so I'm trying to minimize the problem if I want them to adopt ryppl globally (that's my goal). As for hg-git, i didn't knwo about it, thanks for the link.
3. At the risk of alienating some people… I believe Git is going to win the DVCS wars. It has the momentum. And as truly obnoxious as Linus' remarks about other VCSes have been, I have been working with them too recently, and I am forced to agree with him. So I'm personally not interested in investing much effort in other VCSes.
Let's see. I'm rather agnostic on this side. Whatever do the work properly for me is good.
4. However, if someone comes along who wants to do the work, and can make me confident that s/he'll maintain it, and can make me confident that the system won't have to sacrifice usability, well then I have no objections :^)
It may be this guy we'll end up hiring for our own concern that will have to work wiht ryppl anyway. -- ___________________________________________ Joel Falcou - Assistant Professor PARALL Team - LRI - Universite Paris Sud XI Tel : (+33)1 69 15 66 35
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:10 PM, David Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
At Mon, 24 May 2010 19:47:00 +0200, joel falcou wrote:
It seems counterproductive to be tied to git for the distribution part.
At the risk of alienating some people… I believe Git is going to win the DVCS wars.
At the risk of alienating myself, I think there is a faulty assumption here. I see no reason to believe that there is going to be a clear cut single "winner" with DVCS. The systems clearly differentiate themselves. Quality of windows OS support, performance, and learning curve are just a few examples. If the future turns out as I expect, choice of DVCS is going to be similar to a choice of vim or emacs - mac or windows. -- David Sankel Sankel Software www.sankelsoftware.com 585 617 4748 (Office)
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 10:23 AM, David Sankel <camior@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:10 PM, David Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
At Mon, 24 May 2010 19:47:00 +0200, joel falcou wrote:
It seems counterproductive to be tied to git for the distribution part.
At the risk of alienating some people… I believe Git is going to win the DVCS wars.
At the risk of alienating myself, I think there is a faulty assumption here. I see no reason to believe that there is going to be a clear cut single "winner" with DVCS. The systems clearly differentiate themselves. Quality of windows OS support, performance, and learning curve are just a few examples. If the future turns out as I expect, choice of DVCS is going to be similar to a choice of vim or emacs - mac or windows.
True, but then even in the choices available, we're going to have to start somewhere. And I think the largest reach for the most part would be to support git and then if someone does feel strongly about it, then make it work for mercurial, bazaar, subversion, or <insert your favorite version control system here>. Like Dave has already pointed out, Pip already abstracts this plugin subsystem out anyway, so it's just a matter of writing the glue that Pip can use to understand other VCSes -- I don't see how choosing to support git first or thinking that it will win over the others is a bad thing though. -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com
At Tue, 25 May 2010 10:39:46 +0800, Dean Michael Berris wrote:
At the risk of alienating myself, I think there is a faulty assumption here. I see no reason to believe that there is going to be a clear cut single "winner" with DVCS. The systems clearly differentiate themselves. Quality of windows OS support, performance, and learning curve are just a few examples. If the future turns out as I expect, choice of DVCS is going to be similar to a choice of vim or emacs - mac or windows.
True, but then even in the choices available, we're going to have to start somewhere. And I think the largest reach for the most part would be to support git and then if someone does feel strongly about it, then make it work for mercurial, bazaar, subversion, or <insert your favorite version control system here>. Like Dave has already pointed out, Pip already abstracts this plugin subsystem out anyway, so it's just a matter of writing the glue that Pip can use to understand other VCSes -- I don't see how choosing to support git first or thinking that it will win over the others is a bad thing though.
Actually, it turns out I was (sort of) wrong: one of the things you can do with git that you can't with mercurial is important to making this system efficient: getting a list of the branches and tags in a remote repository. With mercurial, you have to clone the whole danged thing. I'm still inclined to tell people who want to use other VCSes to use adaptors like hg-git, git-svn, etc. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On 5/24/2010 10:23 PM, David Sankel wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:10 PM, David Abrahams<dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
At Mon, 24 May 2010 19:47:00 +0200, joel falcou wrote:
It seems counterproductive to be tied to git for the distribution part.
At the risk of alienating some people… I believe Git is going to win the DVCS wars.
At the risk of alienating myself, I think there is a faulty assumption here. I see no reason to believe that there is going to be a clear cut single "winner" with DVCS. The systems clearly differentiate themselves. Quality of windows OS support, performance, and learning curve are just a few examples. If the future turns out as I expect, choice of DVCS is going to be similar to a choice of vim or emacs - mac or windows.
Github is really good. However, my brain cannot support the 5 billion commands of Git. I use Mercurial. I think Boost using Git is good because it will force me to learn Git properly. Sohail PS: Emacs
At Mon, 24 May 2010 22:56:24 -0400, Sohail Somani wrote:
Github is really good. However, my brain cannot support the 5 billion commands of Git. I use Mercurial. I think Boost using Git is good because it will force me to learn Git properly.
Sohail
PS: Emacs
In that case, try magit. I'm lovin' it. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
At Mon, 24 May 2010 22:23:34 -0400, David Sankel wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 2:10 PM, David Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
At Mon, 24 May 2010 19:47:00 +0200, joel falcou wrote:
It seems counterproductive to be tied to git for the distribution part.
At the risk of alienating some people… I believe Git is going to win the DVCS wars.
At the risk of alienating myself, I think there is a faulty assumption here. I see no reason to believe that there is going to be a clear cut single "winner" with DVCS. The systems clearly differentiate themselves. Quality of windows OS support, performance, and learning curve are just a few examples. If the future turns out as I expect, choice of DVCS is going to be similar to a choice of vim or emacs - mac or windows.
I speculate; you speculate. We'll see. It's just what I predict. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Eric Niebler <eric@boostpro.com> wrote:
Before we could consider switching to something like ryppl and cmake, it needs to be proven *and* there needs to some folks (plural) committed to maintaining it long-term. To that end, I'm throwing my hat in the ring. I'll be moving to Boston for the summer to help Dave turn ryppl/cmake into a viable alternative. Dave and I are both here for the long-term and are deeply invested in making Boost just work.
I plan to resume work on my machine learning library when I return from TDY in June. I would much prefer to move out of the current sandbox and into a git repo, so I'm tossing my hat into the ring as well. Jon
At Mon, 24 May 2010 11:50:19 -0600, Jonathan Franklin wrote:
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Eric Niebler <eric@boostpro.com> wrote:
Before we could consider switching to something like ryppl and cmake, it needs to be proven *and* there needs to some folks (plural) committed to maintaining it long-term. To that end, I'm throwing my hat in the ring. I'll be moving to Boston for the summer to help Dave turn ryppl/cmake into a viable alternative. Dave and I are both here for the long-term and are deeply invested in making Boost just work.
I plan to resume work on my machine learning library when I return from TDY in June. I would much prefer to move out of the current sandbox and into a git repo, so I'm tossing my hat into the ring as well.
Yay! For anyone who wants to participate, please sign up for the ryppl-dev google group, the #ryppl IRC channel on freenode, and check out the README at http://github.com/ryppl/ryppl. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
2. Because BoostCon has been an excellent regular customer, the Aspen Meadows is offering a $20/night discount for any Boost participant who
Kudos to all the hard-working folks who make BoostCon possible... I didn't make it this year, but hope to make 2011. $20 off per night is a pretty good savings, and I'll grant you that the venue is spectacular, even with the savings The Meadows is $170 per night. That's by far the highest-priced lodging that I stay in during the year, enough so that last time I went it got flagged by the travel auditors at the company I worked for at the time. Aspen is also inconvenient to get to... there are very few direct flights and Aspen inevitably commands a ticket premium over a major hub like LA or Chicago. There's a mini-rationale at http://www.boostcon.com/about/faq#why-aspen, and I'm not suggesting any change for 2011, but I've been to other small C++ conferences like "The C++ Seminar" that worked very well in modest hotels. Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue. If this isn't the right list to post this on, let me know and I'll post it somewhere else. Erik
On 05/18/2010 05:35 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue.
I agree with you. Even if the venue is very nice, it's also very inconvenient, at least for many of us. FWIW, Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
On 5/18/2010 4:50 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 05/18/2010 05:35 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue.
I agree with you. Even if the venue is very nice, it's also very inconvenient, at least for many of us.
Same here.. And I've volunteered my time to do the on-the-ground work if the conference moved to the Chicago area in the past (after the first year we organized the conference). -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
Rene Rivera wrote:
On 5/18/2010 4:50 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 05/18/2010 05:35 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue.
I agree with you. Even if the venue is very nice, it's also very inconvenient, at least for many of us.
Same here.. And I've volunteered my time to do the on-the-ground work if the conference moved to the Chicago area in the past (after the first year we organized the conference).
Some time ago - within the past year - I suggested that another venue be considered. Having been to my first BoostCon - I don't think there is any better place to have this conference. a) The place was spectacular. b) I love being able to tell people I gave a talk held at the Apspen Institue for Physics. c) I love the architecture d) I love the gym/swimming pool e) I love renting a bike for $50/week and riding around down and going on excursions on the surrounding bike paths. f) Denver airport is a hub and I don't see that anywhere would be much less inconvenient at least for me. g) The hotel is expensive by my usual standards and this is a factor for me. There are other rooms in town at about 1/2 the cost. So this shouldn't be a major obstacle. In my case, I shared a room with Vicente so the cost as quite reasonable. The room is really a suite with a "working" area separteed from the sleeping area + an outdoor patio. Also has microwave, fridge, coffee machine, etc. So in practice, it's plenty comfortable. h) I found that eating more than one restaurant meal/day at 8000 feet leaves me with a large ball in my gut. So having some fruit/snacks in the fridge along with the free pastries between morning sessions worked well out for me. And of course saves a ton of money since restaurants are very expensive. (note to hotel, they could make a lot more money if they gave out discount coupons (25%?) to boost attendies to eat in their restaurant). All in all, the altitude, bike rides, restaurant situation, etc. resulted in a net loss of 3lbs for me over the week. Some of the conference sessions were also interesting. Robert Ramey
On 5/18/2010 7:52 PM, Robert Ramey wrote:
Some time ago - within the past year - I suggested that another venue be considered.
Having been to my first BoostCon - I don't think there is any better place to have this conference.
I have to agree with all the points you made. Even though I did not go this year, I'll have to hang out with you next year.
At Tue, 18 May 2010 16:57:02 -0500, Rene Rivera wrote:
On 5/18/2010 4:50 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 05/18/2010 05:35 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue.
I agree with you. Even if the venue is very nice, it's also very inconvenient, at least for many of us.
Same here.. And I've volunteered my time to do the on-the-ground work if the conference moved to the Chicago area in the past (after the first year we organized the conference).
Every year at BoostCon we discuss this. I don't think there's enough interest—among those that actually show up—in exploring other locations to make alternatives practical. I know I'm not much interested in holding BoostCon anywhere in the US other than Aspen, because 1. atmosphere counts, and the conference just wouldn't be the same anywhere else. 2. at this point, BoostCon pretty much goes off without a hitch and I don't want to figure out how to do it again in different circumstances. …but if Boost develops a consensus to hold it elsewhere, I certainly won't do anything to stand in the way. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On 5/18/2010 7:12 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
At Tue, 18 May 2010 16:57:02 -0500, Rene Rivera wrote:
On 5/18/2010 4:50 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 05/18/2010 05:35 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue.
I agree with you. Even if the venue is very nice, it's also very inconvenient, at least for many of us.
Same here.. And I've volunteered my time to do the on-the-ground work if the conference moved to the Chicago area in the past (after the first year we organized the conference).
Every year at BoostCon we discuss this. I don't think there's enough interest—among those that actually show up—in exploring other locations to make alternatives practical.
Calling you out on this.. That makes for a biased assessment because the people that would most likely want to have it some place other than Aspen are likely not to show up at Aspen. Even if I've wanted to, I haven't been able to attend because of financial constraints. And if it where half the cost, I would almost certainly attend. And I suspect many others would too. And hence we might see more than a doubling of attendance.
I know I'm not much interested in holding BoostCon anywhere in the US other than Aspen, because
1. atmosphere counts, and the conference just wouldn't be the same anywhere else.
Which assumes you can't get a similar atmosphere some place else. Note I don't consider the scenery the same as the atmosphere ;-)
2. at this point, BoostCon pretty much goes off without a hitch and I don't want to figure out how to do it again in different circumstances.
That is certainly a big factor in staying at Aspen.
…but if Boost develops a consensus to hold it elsewhere, I certainly won't do anything to stand in the way.
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is: * New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail
On 05/19/2010 04:44 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
Europe ? :) -- Maxime
Maxime van Noppen wrote:
On 05/19/2010 04:44 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
Europe ? :)
OK, I'll take this opportunity to get the stuff out of the bag. I proposed Dave to look at some possibility for a Boost'Con Europe in Paris. The question is: - how may european will show that doesn't come to US ? - how many US citizen won't come cause it's in europe ? - how many US citizen will come cause it's in europe ? basically, will there enough people so the stuff doesn't fail.
Joel Falcou wrote:
OK, I'll take this opportunity to get the stuff out of the bag. I proposed Dave to look at some possibility for a Boost'Con Europe in Paris. The question is:
- how may european will show that doesn't come to US ? - how many US citizen won't come cause it's in europe ? - how many US citizen will come cause it's in europe ?
basically, will there enough people so the stuff doesn't fail.
I have to justify my attendance now and only just succeeded to prove enough value to the company this year. Depending upon the sessions presented each year, the job can be easier or harder, of course. However, I am 99% certain I couldn't justify a trip to Europe sufficiently. I'd expect that a BoostCon in Europe would be for the benefit of those in Europe as those in the US have been for those in the US. I know that you and others have come from around the globe, but you are outnumbered by those from the US and would probably rethink doing so in the future if there were one held in Europe. _____ Rob Stewart robert.stewart@sig.com Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer; Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Stewart, Robert wrote:
I have to justify my attendance now and only just succeeded to prove enough value to the company this year. Depending upon the sessions presented each year, the job can be easier or harder, of course. However, I am 99% certain I couldn't justify a trip to Europe sufficiently.
I guess so
I'd expect that a BoostCon in Europe would be for the benefit of those in Europe as those in the US have been for those in the US. I know that you and others have come from around the globe, but you are outnumbered by those from the US and would probably rethink doing so in the future if there were one held in Europe.
Well, there are a friggin lot of german each year ina spen, like 10% of the attendee or some such no ? But i got your point
On 05/19/2010 05:00 PM, Joel Falcou wrote:
OK, I'll take this opportunity to get the stuff out of the bag. I proposed Dave to look at some possibility for a Boost'Con Europe in Paris. The question is:
- how may european will show that doesn't come to US ? - how many US citizen won't come cause it's in europe ? - how many US citizen will come cause it's in europe ?
basically, will there enough people so the stuff doesn't fail.
Being quite new to the list and to boost I have no idea of how many EU folks hang around on the list. Are there any reliable numbers about this ? I don't know how it works currently, do the speakers have part of their expenses (travel / conference) refunded ? If not, would it be conceivable for a EU Boost'Con ? -- Maxime
At Wed, 19 May 2010 17:44:30 +0200, Maxime van Noppen wrote:
I don't know how it works currently, do the speakers have part of their expenses (travel / conference) refunded ? If not, would it be conceivable for a EU Boost'Con ?
We pay their conference registration fee -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
At Wed, 19 May 2010 17:00:35 +0200, Joel Falcou wrote:
Maxime van Noppen wrote:
On 05/19/2010 04:44 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
Europe ? :)
OK, I'll take this opportunity to get the stuff out of the bag. I proposed Dave to look at some possibility for a Boost'Con Europe in Paris. The question is:
- how may european will show that doesn't come to US ? - how many US citizen won't come cause it's in europe ? - how many US citizen will come cause it's in europe ?
basically, will there enough people so the stuff doesn't fail.
And, more important for me, if there's a BoostCon in Europe, would BoostCon US effectively cease to be an international conference? One of the best things about BoostCon IMO is the strong presence of attendees from all around the globe. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
And, more important for me, if there's a BoostCon in Europe, would BoostCon US effectively cease to be an international conference? One of the best things about BoostCon IMO is the strong presence of attendees from all around the globe.
+1 to this... makes BoostCon much better. Erik
On 05/19/2010 12:33 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
One of the best things about BoostCon IMO is the strong presence of attendees from all around the globe.
Definitely true, but that's also a reason to try to find a location that works good for everyone (read: is convenient to reach). Stefan -- ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...
David Abrahams wrote:
And, more important for me, if there's a BoostCon in Europe, would BoostCon US effectively cease to be an international conference? One of the best things about BoostCon IMO is the strong presence of attendees from all around the globe.
I'm not an expert of air travel but I think that in average, it will make the travel cheaper for some and a bit more expensive for other. I dunno for example if it's more expensive for Joel dG or other far lcoated peopel to go to europe than to go to center US. It's a non-trivial question indeed. Maybe let's run a poll to see what may happen ? -- ___________________________________________ Joel Falcou - Assistant Professor PARALL Team - LRI - Universite Paris Sud XI Tel : (+33)1 69 15 66 35
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:10 AM, joel falcou <joel.falcou@lri.fr> wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
And, more important for me, if there's a BoostCon in Europe, would BoostCon US effectively cease to be an international conference? One of the best things about BoostCon IMO is the strong presence of attendees from all around the globe.
I'm not an expert of air travel but I think that in average, it will make the travel cheaper for some and a bit more expensive for other. I dunno for example if it's more expensive for Joel dG or other far lcoated peopel to go to europe than to go to center US.
I'm from the Philippines too and that would introduce a VISA acquisition issue for me. Maybe Americans would not have the same problem though, but I for one do not have a VISA to any country in Europe. For me personally it was more convenient to go to the US because I have a VISA that allows me to enter the US until 2012. That is something that needs to be considered if BoostCon would be moved to Europe.
It's a non-trivial question indeed. Maybe let's run a poll to see what may happen ?
I would think that the availability of volunteers to make it happen would be the main issue. Should we poll for volunteers and concrete proposals instead of whether people will be attending? -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
I'm from the Philippines too and that would introduce a VISA acquisition issue for me. Maybe Americans would not have the same problem though, but I for one do not have a VISA to any country in Europe.
For me personally it was more convenient to go to the US because I have a VISA that allows me to enter the US until 2012.
That is something that needs to be considered if BoostCon would be moved to Europe.
Ah visa indeed.
I would think that the availability of volunteers to make it happen would be the main issue. Should we poll for volunteers and concrete proposals instead of whether people will be attending?
Well, I am a volunteer, we have talk abotu that for a whiel with Dave. As for the proposal, I was planning to get one at B'Con 10 but some paperwork were not recevied. The idea is more than idea as I already have multiple place to be considered and various overall week planning. -- ___________________________________________ Joel Falcou - Assistant Professor PARALL Team - LRI - Universite Paris Sud XI Tel : (+33)1 69 15 66 35
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:26 AM, joel falcou <joel.falcou@lri.fr> wrote:
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
I would think that the availability of volunteers to make it happen would be the main issue. Should we poll for volunteers and concrete proposals instead of whether people will be attending?
Well, I am a volunteer, we have talk abotu that for a whiel with Dave. As for the proposal, I was planning to get one at B'Con 10 but some paperwork were not recevied. The idea is more than idea as I already have multiple place to be considered and various overall week planning.
Cool, well it would be good to have all the details of BoostCon in Europe worked out -- budget, accommodations, itinerary, and other things like facilities and content. Once those are worked out and actually in a form that can be commented on then I think we should poll on whether it should be done and whether people will attend. I for one would like to go see the world too and Europe is still one big thunk of land and water that I would like to at least go to at least once in my life. :) -- Dean Michael Berris deanberris.com
Op 19-5-2010 19:45, Dean Michael Berris schreef:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:26 AM, joel falcou<joel.falcou@lri.fr> wrote:
Dean Michael Berris wrote:
I would think that the availability of volunteers to make it happen would be the main issue. Should we poll for volunteers and concrete proposals instead of whether people will be attending?
Well, I am a volunteer, we have talk abotu that for a whiel with Dave. As for the proposal, I was planning to get one at B'Con 10 but some paperwork were not recevied. The idea is more than idea as I already have multiple place to be considered and various overall week planning.
Cool, well it would be good to have all the details of BoostCon in Europe worked out -- budget, accommodations, itinerary, and other things like facilities and content. Once those are worked out and actually in a form that can be commented on then I think we should poll on whether it should be done and whether people will attend.
I for one would like to go see the world too and Europe is still one big thunk of land and water that I would like to at least go to at least once in my life. :)
BoostCon Paris would be cool indeed. One of the considerations of having it also once (or once every X year) in Europe is that there are also many European people working on Boost Libraries, they often do it in spare time and expenses are theirs, having it in Europe makes it more easy to come. I also mentioned (off-list) Amsterdam, also a hub, and in that case I could be of help. However, we also have to take into account the continuous availability of the convenient facilities in Aspen, which are (AFAIU) easily organized a year before, so now for 2011, such that the conference can be organized smoothly there, every year without the need to gather a new group of volunteers each year. Regards, Barend
barend wrote:
BoostCon Paris would be cool indeed. One of the considerations of having it also once (or once every X year) in Europe is that there are also many European people working on Boost Libraries, they often do it in spare time and expenses are theirs, having it in Europe makes it more easy to come.
Thus my initial inquiry about the potential nbr of european ppl that may show up.
I also mentioned (off-list) Amsterdam, also a hub, and in that case I could be of help.
Someone also propsoed Zurich
However, we also have to take into account the continuous availability of the convenient facilities in Aspen, which are (AFAIU) easily organized a year before, so now for 2011, such that the conference can be organized smoothly there, every year without the need to gather a new group of volunteers each year.
My current goal is to settle somehting like that too around so once every X year,we have our spot.
I also mentioned (off-list) Amsterdam, also a hub, and in that case I could be of help.
Someone also propsoed Zurich
Zürich is really a great place. It's accessible by train for most Europeans. Major drawback I see in Paris is the price. Paris is outrageously expensive. -Edouard
I also mentioned (off-list) Amsterdam, also a hub, and in that case I could be of help.
Someone also propsoed Zurich
Zürich is really a great place. It's accessible by train for most Europeans.
Major drawback I see in Paris is the price. Paris is outrageously expensive.
What is the target audience for a possible BoostCon Europe? If it is "worldwide", then it should be in a major hub like Paris, London, Frankfurt or Amsterdam, because otherwise e.g. US-Zurich will be as long as Europe-Aspen.
On 20 May 2010 13:53, Barend Gehrels <barend@geodan.nl> wrote:
What is the target audience for a possible BoostCon Europe? If it is "worldwide", then it should be in a major hub like Paris, London, Frankfurt or Amsterdam, because otherwise e.g. US-Zurich will be as long as Europe-Aspen.
I have no opinion on Zürich itself, but I do know that Air Canada flies there direct from Toronto, United flies there direct from Washington, and Swissair flys there from many big non-hub cities (such as Montreal, the flight I took).
I have no opinion on Zürich itself, but I do know that Air Canada flies there direct from Toronto, United flies there direct from Washington, and Swissair flys there from many big non-hub cities (such as Montreal, the flight I took).
I was a bit triggered by the train story. But of course if Zürich has good connections, great. Would be cool. Barend
Meet me at BoostCon! On May 20, 2010, at 1:35 PM, Scott McMurray <me22.ca+boost@gmail.com> wrote:
I have no opinion on Zürich itself, but I do know that Air Canada flies there direct from Toronto, United flies there direct from Washington, and Swissair flys there from many big non-hub cities (such as Montreal, the flight I took).
…and it would continue the theme of being surrounded by mountains.
On 20 May 2010 08:27, Joel Falcou <joel.falcou@lri.fr> wrote:
barend wrote:
BoostCon Paris would be cool indeed. One of the considerations of having
it also once (or once every X year) in Europe is that there are also many European people working on Boost Libraries, they often do it in spare time and expenses are theirs, having it in Europe makes it more easy to come.
Thus my initial inquiry about the potential nbr of european ppl that may show up.
I also mentioned (off-list) Amsterdam, also a hub, and in that case I
could be of help.
Someone also propsoed Zurich
FWIW, I'd also like to express my interest in a BoostCon event in Europe. If there is a possibility of this happening I would also like to volunteer. Glyn
On 19/05/10 16:08, Maxime van Noppen wrote:
On 05/19/2010 04:44 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
Europe ? :)
+1 Or the locations from the list but on the east coast. Best regards, -- Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
On Wed, 19 May 2010 09:44:47 -0500, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot@gmail.com> wrote:
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people
to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
Cities with direct flight from major European cities would have my preference. Aspen is pretty remote when you come from Europe. My personal preference would go for NYC, but that's just because I like the city. I'm sure I could rationalize if needed. ;) Nevertheless, as long as I don't have to connect and prices are reasonable I'm all for it. I'm not sure the location is that important regarding the atmosphere of a conference. What matters are the people and the talks. I'm however pretty certain location is paramount when people decide to come or not. I understand it's delicate to make a conference successful and finding "the" right new location is going to require several iterations, but to grow a plant you have to move it to a larger pot. -Edouard
At Wed, 19 May 2010 17:10:49 +0200, <edouard@fausse.info> wrote:
I'm not sure the location is that important regarding the atmosphere of a conference. What matters are the people and the talks. I'm however pretty certain location is paramount when people decide to come or not.
I understand it's delicate to make a conference successful and finding "the" right new location is going to require several iterations, but to grow a plant you have to move it to a larger pot.
And then one has to ask whether, and how fast, BoostCon should be grown. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
And then one has to ask whether, and how fast, BoostCon should be grown.
Exactly. My feeling is that BoostCon is really a great conference and I think it's a shame that there aren't more people attending. However, I understand people who prefer to keep it "as is" because growing something means changing it (notwithstanding the additional work it will incur). -Edouard
Rene Rivera wrote:
On 5/18/2010 7:12 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
Rene Rivera wrote:
On 5/18/2010 4:50 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 05/18/2010 05:35 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue.
Every year at BoostCon we discuss this. I don't think there's enough interest-among those that actually show up-in exploring other locations to make alternatives practical.
Calling you out on this.. That makes for a biased assessment because the people that would most likely want to have it some place other than Aspen are likely not to show up at Aspen.
I thought of the same issue when I first read Dave's response, but I was considering how to respond.
Even if I've wanted to, I haven't been able to attend because of financial constraints.
I've been fortunate to get the backing of my employer, so the cost is not a burden to them as it would be if I had to foot the bill myself.
And if it where half the cost, I would almost certainly attend. And I suspect many others would too. And hence we might see more than a doubling of attendance.
That alone precludes the current site; we can't handle many more attending given space constraints.
I know I'm not much interested in holding BoostCon anywhere in the US other than Aspen, because
1. atmosphere counts, and the conference just wouldn't be the same anywhere else.
Which assumes you can't get a similar atmosphere some place else. Note I don't consider the scenery the same as the atmosphere ;-)
There's a lot to be said for the location. When not entirely engrossed by the week's activities, it was wonderful to get outside and enjoy the fresh mountain air and take in the scenery. I spent many hours doing just that. The relative proximity of downtown Aspen -- ready walking distance for most -- was helpful as it afforded a reasonable selection of restaurants and cafes for lunch and dinner. However, many of us found so little time available this year to devote to conference activities that we often sought the hotel shuttle or private vehicles to reduce transit time to and from meals. Consequently, any other pleasant location with nearby eating (and drinking, for many) establishments, even if beyond comfortable walking distance, would suffice, I think.
2. at this point, BoostCon pretty much goes off without a hitch and I don't want to figure out how to do it again in different circumstances.
That is certainly a big factor in staying at Aspen.
Agreed.
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
Perhaps we should discuss requirements in a little more detail before suggesting locations. Supposing twice as many would attend if the cost were half this year's, then there must be room for nearly 200 in a single auditorium, plus at least one other room capable of holding half that many to account for at least two simultaneous tracks and the keynote. With that number of attendees, it isn't unreasonable to think of three or four tracks (one for tutorials on Boost libraries, for example). Each meeting room must have (augmented no doubt) provision for electrical outlets for one portable computer per attendee. Each meeting room must have a projector and screen with signal support for PCs and Macs. Each meeting room must have tables and chairs or school auditorium-style student seats with integrated desktops to support notebooks (the paper kind as well as the electronic kind!) and laptops. The Physics Center has been extremely valuable simply due to the access to various work rooms with desks/tables, chairs, and whiteboards or chalkboards. The meeting rooms, work rooms, and hotel rooms must have good wireless and, optionally, wired Internet access for PCs and Macs. We have had a picnic each year, just for fun and networking. That requires access to grills, picnic tables, etc. The hotel rooms have often been the location for collaboration, too, so something more than the smallest would be useful. There may well be other requirements I've missed, but any proposed location must be rather specific about the venue in order that it can be known to supply these requirements and so cost can be assessed. Just mentioning a city seems insufficient. _____ Rob Stewart robert.stewart@sig.com Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer; Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
At Wed, 19 May 2010 11:11:24 -0400, Stewart, Robert wrote:
And if it where half the cost, I would almost certainly attend. And I suspect many others would too. And hence we might see more than a doubling of attendance.
That alone precludes the current site; we can't handle many more attending given space constraints.
That's not exactly true. If we get enough conference registrations to be able to pay for them, there are additional facilities we can use at the Meadows and/or next door to the Physics Center.
Perhaps we should discuss requirements in a little more detail before suggesting locations.
First requirement: a group of motivated volunteers to organize a conference in a different location. You need someone to receive your suggestions.
The Physics Center has been extremely valuable simply due to the access to various work rooms with desks/tables, chairs, and whiteboards or chalkboards.
Not to mention friendly, knowledgeable, and competent support staff on site, and access to some nice facilities (grills, bikes). -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
Stewart, Robert wrote:
That alone precludes the current site; we can't handle many more attending given space constraints.
That's not exactly true. If we get enough conference registrations to be able to pay for them, there are additional facilities we can use at the Meadows and/or next door to the Physics Center.
Granted, but at least some of those facilities aren't close enough to permit swapping rooms when attendance is unbalanced or even moving from one to the other during session transitions as is now possible. _____ Rob Stewart robert.stewart@sig.com Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer; Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
On 19 May 2010 10:11, Stewart, Robert <Robert.Stewart@sig.com> wrote:
Supposing twice as many would attend if the cost were half this year's, then there must be room for nearly 200 in a single auditorium, plus at least one other room capable of holding half that many to account for at least two simultaneous tracks and the keynote. With that number of attendees, it isn't unreasonable to think of three or four tracks (one for tutorials on Boost libraries, for example).
Doubling the number of talks is a different issue. Now, some people have tutorial talks they've made in other venues which they can adapt to BoostCon, adding another 15-20 talks seems like a lot. Plus, the draw (for me, anyway) is that most of the talks are not repeats of previous BoostCon talks. If we are doing this in a hotel in a big city, it is rarely off-season, and we'll have to commit to the conference rooms long before speakers commit to their talks. I'm not against tutorials; rather, logistics are never easy. Another thought: if the conference is going to move for 2012, there had better be a plan and point person for 2013 by the end of BoostCon 2011... Nevin -- Nevin Liber <mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com> (847) 691-1404
At Wed, 19 May 2010 09:44:47 -0500, Rene Rivera wrote:
On 5/18/2010 7:12 PM, David Abrahams wrote:
At Tue, 18 May 2010 16:57:02 -0500, Rene Rivera wrote:
On 5/18/2010 4:50 PM, Stefan Seefeld wrote:
On 05/18/2010 05:35 PM, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
Anyway, I'm just curious what people think about Aspen or alternatives for a BoostCon venue.
I agree with you. Even if the venue is very nice, it's also very inconvenient, at least for many of us.
Same here.. And I've volunteered my time to do the on-the-ground work if the conference moved to the Chicago area in the past (after the first year we organized the conference).
Every year at BoostCon we discuss this. I don't think there's enough interest—among those that actually show up—in exploring other locations to make alternatives practical.
Calling you out on this.. That makes for a biased assessment because the people that would most likely want to have it some place other than Aspen are likely not to show up at Aspen.
Oh, I'm well aware.
Even if I've wanted to, I haven't been able to attend because of financial constraints. And if it where half the cost, I would almost certainly attend. And I suspect many others would too. And hence we might see more than a doubling of attendance.
Yep, and it would be a totally different conference. Among those who attended this year, there was little interest in going out of our way to grow the conference --- everybody liked the intimate atmosphere.
I know I'm not much interested in holding BoostCon anywhere in the US other than Aspen, because
1. atmosphere counts, and the conference just wouldn't be the same anywhere else.
Which assumes you can't get a similar atmosphere some place else. Note I don't consider the scenery the same as the atmosphere ;-)
It's not; it's just one component.
2. at this point, BoostCon pretty much goes off without a hitch and I don't want to figure out how to do it again in different circumstances.
That is certainly a big factor in staying at Aspen.
…but if Boost develops a consensus to hold it elsewhere, I certainly won't do anything to stand in the way.
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York
New York isn't exactly a cheap place to do anything, is it?
* New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
May as well add Boston. -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On 19 May 2010 09:44, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot@gmail.com> wrote:
1. atmosphere counts, and the conference just wouldn't be the same anywhere else.
Which assumes you can't get a similar atmosphere some place else. Note I don't consider the scenery the same as the atmosphere ;-)
Aspen is isolated, which works very well for BoostCon. For instance, if you walk to a restaurant in town (and you can walk; you don't have to drive or cab it), it is very likely you'll run into other BoostCon folks. And given that it is off season, you can get in just about anywhere w/o a reservation. There are no other evening distractions, so people come back for the after dinner sessions, and wake up for the morning sessions. If you hold it near a big city, you may lose that. Big cities have a night life. Many of us traveling to big cities have friends we rarely get to see face to face that we'll take time at night to visit. Even for locals, they don't tend to stay at the hotel, as it is hard to justify the cost. And it is also easier for locals to get sucked back into work projects because they haven't actually travelled anywhere. Those things go against the intimacy of BoostCon.
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
It isn't just picking a city. Someone needs to commit to being the point person to make sure that things happen, even if the other volunteers have to bail. I've put on minor events, and I've watched friends put on major events, and it is a lot of work. And if we skip Aspen, it may hurt the relationships we've built up with the Meadows and the Physics Center. Changing the venue has consequences. Personally, I vote for keeping it in Aspen. -- Nevin Liber <mailto:nevin@eviloverlord.com> (847) 691-1404
On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 7:52 PM, Nevin Liber <nevin@eviloverlord.com> wrote:
On 19 May 2010 09:44, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot@gmail.com> wrote:
1. atmosphere counts, and the conference just wouldn't be the same anywhere else.
Which assumes you can't get a similar atmosphere some place else. Note I don't consider the scenery the same as the atmosphere ;-)
Aspen is isolated, which works very well for BoostCon.
For instance, if you walk to a restaurant in town (and you can walk; you don't have to drive or cab it), it is very likely you'll run into other BoostCon folks. And given that it is off season, you can get in just about anywhere w/o a reservation.
There are no other evening distractions, so people come back for the after dinner sessions, and wake up for the morning sessions.
If you hold it near a big city, you may lose that. Big cities have a night life. Many of us traveling to big cities have friends we rarely get to see face to face that we'll take time at night to visit.
Even for locals, they don't tend to stay at the hotel, as it is hard to justify the cost. And it is also easier for locals to get sucked back into work projects because they haven't actually travelled anywhere.
Those things go against the intimacy of BoostCon.
OK, perhaps a poll is in order at this point. I'll set one up for people to fill out.. Do people have suggestions as to good places to consider for holding some future BoostCon at? My shorts list is:
* New York * New Jersey * Toronto * Chicago
It isn't just picking a city. Someone needs to commit to being the point person to make sure that things happen, even if the other volunteers have to bail. I've put on minor events, and I've watched friends put on major events, and it is a lot of work.
And if we skip Aspen, it may hurt the relationships we've built up with the Meadows and the Physics Center. Changing the venue has consequences.
Personally, I vote for keeping it in Aspen.
+1 for keeping it in Aspen. I should actually be able to attend next year, unless it is held further away, then travel costs raise that to a near impossibility again. I live only a 9-10 hour drive from Aspen, so the room costs are my main thing to deal with.
At Thu, 20 May 2010 18:29:54 -0600, OvermindDL1 wrote:
It isn't just picking a city. Someone needs to commit to being the point person to make sure that things happen, even if the other volunteers have to bail. I've put on minor events, and I've watched friends put on major events, and it is a lot of work.
And if we skip Aspen, it may hurt the relationships we've built up with the Meadows and the Physics Center. Changing the venue has consequences.
Personally, I vote for keeping it in Aspen.
+1 for keeping it in Aspen.
I should actually be able to attend next year, unless it is held further away, then travel costs raise that to a near impossibility again. I live only a 9-10 hour drive from Aspen, so the room costs are my main thing to deal with.
One way we could make it financially easier for many more to attend would be to facilitate/coordinate room sharing. Many of these “rooms” are actually moderate-sized apartments, with plenty of room so two people can have private areas. Actually this is my wife's idea :-) -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
OvermindDL1 wrote:
I should actually be able to attend next year, unless it is held further away, then travel costs raise that to a near impossibility again. I live only a 9-10 hour drive from Aspen, so the room costs are my main thing to deal with.
One way we could make it financially easier for many more to attend would be to facilitate/coordinate room sharing. Many of these "rooms" are actually moderate-sized apartments, with plenty of room so two people can have private areas. Actually this is my wife's idea :-)
Not all rooms have two beds, of course, so that must be stipulated when desired. It would be helpful to know certain details about those that might share a room such as the propensity to snore, being a night owl versus a morning person (accounting for time zone changes), etc. _____ Rob Stewart robert.stewart@sig.com Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer; Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
David Abrahams wrote:
One way we could make it financially easier for many more to attend would be to facilitate/coordinate room sharing. Many of these "rooms" are actually moderate-sized apartments, with plenty of room so two people can have private areas. Actually this is my wife's idea :-)
lol - I can relate to that. This is the first year I went. Since I pay from my own pocket cost is a consideration for me. I arranged to share a room with Vicente and it worked very well dispite quite different habits. I'm an early riser, he's more a night owl. He snores I fart, etc. Basically the "room" was really a large room with two queen beds and a dividing partition. It as quite practical for one person to be working in the "living room" (or even out on the private patio!) while the other slept. Also, the room had a little area with a microwave, refridgerator and coffee machine so I bought some fruit and put it in the fridge and made my own breakfast - for free every morning. The hotel split the bill with no problem. And Vicente was great company. Bottom line is that for me the room cost was around $80 + fees and taxes. So I think those who have cost concerns should give this serious consideration. Robert Ramey
Robert Ramey wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
One way we could make it financially easier for many more to attend would be to facilitate/coordinate room sharing. Many of these "rooms" are actually moderate-sized apartments, with plenty of room so two people can have private areas. Actually this is my wife's idea :-)
I arranged to share a room with Vicente and it worked very well dispite quite different habits. [snip list of gross personal habits!] Basically the "room" was really a large room with two queen beds and a dividing partition. It as quite practical for one person to be working in the "living room" (or even out on the private patio!) while the other slept. Also, the
They have several room configurations. In the past, I've been in smaller rooms with two beds next to one another near the bathroom only partly divided from the living room/kitchen areas. (According to the web site[1], that would be the Junior Suite.) That room is less amenable to sharing by strangers. This year, I was surprised to get a larger room with a king size bed on the one side and the living room on the other, with the kitchenette, bathroom, and entrance hall between. (The One-bedroom Suite.) Sharing a bed would be off-putting to many, but the sleeper sofa in the living room could be used by one occupant. You got one with two queen size beds with some sort of a divider between them. (I don't see that floor plan listed at the web site, but I guess it was the Two-bedroom Suite.) I can well imagine that to be shared easily. Those considering sharing a room next year clearly must choose rooms with these particulars in mind, which might necessitate early reservations. [1] <http://www.dolce-aspen-hotel.com/accommodations/accommodations.asp> _____ Rob Stewart robert.stewart@sig.com Software Engineer, Core Software using std::disclaimer; Susquehanna International Group, LLP http://www.sig.com IMPORTANT: The information contained in this email and/or its attachments is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by reply and immediately delete this message and all its attachments. Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or dissemination of this message or any attachment by an unintended recipient is strictly prohibited. Neither this message nor any attachment is intended as or should be construed as an offer, solicitation or recommendation to buy or sell any security or other financial instrument. Neither the sender, his or her employer nor any of their respective affiliates makes any warranties as to the completeness or accuracy of any of the information contained herein or that this message or any of its attachments is free of viruses.
Stewart, Robert wrote:
Robert Ramey wrote:
You got one with two queen size beds with some sort of a divider between them. (I don't see that floor plan listed at the web site, but I guess it was the Two-bedroom Suite.) I can well imagine that to be shared easily.
I just asked for the two queen beds. The room was divided into two distinct areas - sleeping an living. worked out just fine. http://dolceaspenhotel.supertour.com/?page=junior#p=1231460&y=138.87&pi=0&sbm=mjuniorsuite&sbtsi=junior shows the exact room. I guess this is referred to as a "junior suite". BTW, This is the exact view I had out my window. Very cool. Robert Ramey
----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Ramey" <ramey@rrsd.com> To: <boost@lists.boost.org> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2010 6:30 PM Subject: Re: [boost] BoostCon 2011 Dates and Hotel Discount (this week only!)
David Abrahams wrote:
One way we could make it financially easier for many more to attend would be to facilitate/coordinate room sharing. Many of these "rooms" are actually moderate-sized apartments, with plenty of room so two people can have private areas. Actually this is my wife's idea :-)
lol - I can relate to that.
This is the first year I went. Since I pay from my own pocket cost is a consideration for me. I arranged to share a room with Vicente and it worked very well dispite quite different habits. I'm an early riser, he's more a night owl. He snores I fart, etc.
Robert, we said that all needed to stay between us ;-) Vicente
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 5:46 AM, David Abrahams <dave@boostpro.com> wrote:
At Thu, 20 May 2010 18:29:54 -0600, OvermindDL1 wrote:
It isn't just picking a city. Someone needs to commit to being the point person to make sure that things happen, even if the other volunteers have to bail. I've put on minor events, and I've watched friends put on major events, and it is a lot of work.
And if we skip Aspen, it may hurt the relationships we've built up with the Meadows and the Physics Center. Changing the venue has consequences.
Personally, I vote for keeping it in Aspen.
+1 for keeping it in Aspen.
I should actually be able to attend next year, unless it is held further away, then travel costs raise that to a near impossibility again. I live only a 9-10 hour drive from Aspen, so the room costs are my main thing to deal with.
One way we could make it financially easier for many more to attend would be to facilitate/coordinate room sharing. Many of these “rooms” are actually moderate-sized apartments, with plenty of room so two people can have private areas. Actually this is my wife's idea :-)
Definitely a good idea. My main issue as always is transportation. I have to minimize my time off from work so it is always a kind of thing as leave as late as possible and so forth, as well as having to pay for *everything* myself. Thankfully a little 10 hour trip by car is only about $90 in gas and lets me keep my own schedule.
David Abrahams wrote:
... I don't think there's enough interest—among those that actually show up—in exploring other locations to make alternatives practical.
I showed up BoostCon'09 and the inconvenience and expense were definitely a factor in my decision not to attend this year even though the schedule of talks looked outstanding. I'm just a sample of one, though. Erik
David Abrahams wrote:
2. at this point, BoostCon pretty much goes off without a hitch and I don't want to figure out how to do it again in different circumstances.
I understand (and appreciate) the hard work that you've done in creating the Boost libraries, BoostCon, and the entire Boost ecosystem. This point alone might be enough to leave things as they are. That being said, I'd be willing to help with arrangements in the Washington, DC area. Erik
On May 18, 2010, at 5:35 PM, "Nelson, Erik - 2" <erik.l.nelson@bankofamerica.com
wrote:
$20 off per night is a pretty good savings, and I'll grant you that the venue is spectacular, even with the savings The Meadows is $170 per night.
$155 ($135 after discount) plus $18 resort fee and tax
At Tue, 18 May 2010 17:35:17 -0400, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
$20 off per night is a pretty good savings, and I'll grant you that the venue is spectacular, even with the savings The Meadows is $170 per night. That's by far the highest-priced lodging that I stay in during the year, enough so that last time I went it got flagged by the travel auditors at the company I worked for at the time.
Would it mesh better with auditors' expectations if conference registration cost $200 more and the hotel cost $40 less per night? -- Dave Abrahams Meet me at BoostCon: http://www.boostcon.com BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
David Abrahams wrote:
At Tue, 18 May 2010 17:35:17 -0400, Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
$20 off per night is a pretty good savings, and I'll grant you that the venue is spectacular, even with the savings The Meadows is $170 per night. That's by far the highest-priced lodging that I stay in during the year, enough so that last time I went it got flagged by the travel auditors at the company I worked for at the time.
Would it mesh better with auditors' expectations if conference registration cost $200 more and the hotel cost $40 less per night?
It would here. Awesome idea. Jeff
David Abrahams wrote:
Nelson, Erik - 2 wrote:
$20 off per night is a pretty good savings, and I'll grant you that the venue is spectacular, even with the savings The Meadows is $170 per night. That's by far the highest-priced lodging that I stay in during the year, enough so that last time I went it got flagged by the travel auditors at the company I worked for at the time.
Would it mesh better with auditors' expectations if conference registration cost $200 more and the hotel cost $40 less per night?
I know it sounds silly, but that probably would sound better. Erik
participants (27)
-
barend -
Barend Gehrels
-
David Abrahams -
David Sankel -
Dean Michael Berris -
Edouard A. -
edouard＠fausse.info
-
Eric Niebler -
Glyn Matthews -
Jeff Flinn -
joel falcou -
Joel Falcou
-
Jonathan Franklin -
Mateusz Loskot -
Maxime van Noppen -
Nelson, Erik - 2 -
Nevin Liber -
OvermindDL1 -
Rene Rivera -
Robert Ramey -
Scott McMurray -
Sohail Somani -
Stefan Seefeld -
Steven Watanabe -
Stewart, Robert -
vicente.botet -
Vladimir Prus