Resposta para a proposta de palestra feita no FISL
Friday, April 4th, 2008 fisl9.0-2008: Speakers’ Corner
Reviews
Proposal Info
- Author: Francisco Keppler Silva Alecrim
- Title: Configurando um ambiente de desenvolvimento no computador pessoal para a plataforma Linux OMAP.
- Track: Kernel
Review results summary
- Classification argument: 485.663
- Minimum classification argument for approaval in track: 523.25042724609
Legend
Confidence: Reviewer’s self evaluation regarding the proposal’s subject.
| G | I don’t know enough about the subject, I’m a generalist. |
|---|---|
| C | I’m not an expert, but feel confortable with the subject |
| E | I’m an expert, know the subject very well. |
Relevance: Proposal’s relevance to th event, based on the abstract provided by the author.
| 1 | None. |
|---|---|
| 2 | Small. |
| 3 | Some. |
| 4 | Much. |
| 5 | Extreme. |
Technical quality: Proposal’s technical quality, based on the abstract provided by the author.
| 1 | None. |
|---|---|
| 2 | Small. |
| 3 | Some. |
| 4 | Much. |
| 5 | Extreme. |
Experience: Author’s experience on the proposal’s subject, based on the mini-curriculum provided by she/he and others sources (web searches, another events, performance among community etc).
| 1 | None. |
|---|---|
| 2 | Small. |
| 3 | Some. |
| 4 | Much. |
| 5 | Extreme. |
Recommendation: What the reviewer suggests to do regarding the proposal.
| R | Strong rejection - I have strong arguments to reject this proposal. |
|---|---|
| r | Weak rejection - I don’t have strong arguments to reject this proposal; I have more arguments do reject this proposal than to accept it. |
| a | Weak acceptance - I don’t have strong arguments to accept this proposal; I have more arguments to accept this proposal than to reject it. |
| A | Strong acceptance - I have strong arguments to accept this proposal. |
Reviews
| Reviewer | Confidence | Relevance | Technical quality | Experience | Recommendation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reviewer #1 | C | 4 | 3 | 4 | A |
| Reviewer #2 | E | 5 | 5 | 5 | A |
| Reviewer #3 | C | 2 | 4 | 3 | r |
| Reviewer #4 | C | 4 | 5 | 4 | A |
| Reviewer #5 | C | 3 | 4 | 3 | r |
| Reviewer #6 | E | 5 | 5 | 5 | A |
| Reviewer #7 | C | 5 | 4 | 4 | A |
| Reviewer #8 | E | 3 | 5 | 5 | A |
| Reviewer #9 | G | 3 | 3 | 3 | a |
| Reviewer #10 | C | 2 | 4 | 4 | R |
Comments to the author
- Reviewer #1:
A proposta nao apresenta a estrutura da palestra, detalhando os topicos e nivel de detalhamento que serah abordado. O CV do autor indica que o mesmo possui conhecimento suficiente na area, contudo nao deixa claro a experiencia do mesmo como palestante. - O assunto eh importante e relevante ao fisl, principalmente se o proponente apresentar os principais problemas enfrentados atualmente e as atuais solucoes ou em andamento, alem das virtudes da tecnologia em questao. - Reviewer #2:
none - Reviewer #3:
Da perspectiva do público do evento, o assunto é muito específico, com uma arquitetura pouco utilizada. - Reviewer #4:
O tema é interessante, mas seu currículo deveria apresentar mais detalhes, incluíndo experiência na ministração de palestras. - Reviewer #5:
none - Reviewer #6:
none - Reviewer #7:
Tema interessante para quem deseja iniciar o desenvolvimento para plataformas portáteis. - Reviewer #8:
none - Reviewer #9:
none - Reviewer #10:
none
Doubts, questions, information and bugs 
: write to programa2008@softwarelivre.org
Copyright © 2003, 2004 Propus.
Copyright © 2005, 2006 Associação Software Livre.Org.
Copyright © 2006 Colibre.
papers is free software distributed under the GNU General Public License.
