This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. Learn More.
Recap /dev/24 2nd edition
NOTE: Recap made by all the organizers of /dev/24
It's been some time since /dev/24 ended and it's time to look back and analyze what /dev/24 was.
The main feeling is that the second edition of /dev/24, on November 3 and 4, had the same spirit as the first one.
If you write {curly braces}, this is for you! If you only read them, it'll help you to write.
On this edition, two main changes were proposed to facilitate participation by making a different conference that could have the advantages of the face-to-face ones, thus avoiding the fatigue of all the online events:
We continued to broadcast 24 hours of community dedicated to Liferay, this time in two days to take advantage of other benefits, such as the platform, another of the novelties.
The world that was created had curious corners to discover and play in.
Before starting with the summary, the first thing to express our gratitude to all the speakers, people who have helped, communities and, of course, to the sponsor USU.
In this summary we will analyze /dev/24 from 4 points of view:
Summary of /dev/24
Feedback received
Analysis of data, attendance, etc.
Proposals for the next edition
In this edition there were 32 sessions (16 each day) with 34 speakers (20 on the first day and 14 on the second), where a wide range of topics were discussed:
QA
Front
Back
Api
Functionalities - forms
Commerce
And another very important topic, the communities, this event is an event of the community for the community in which some of the LUGs could participate.
This is a point that we take very seriously, as it is a community event for the community, so it is important to know your opinion in order to improve the points that have not been liked and continue to strengthen those that have.
In this case we have received comments in which, for example, the map and the platform have liked to interact, but they considered the map a bit confusing, with the jumps between maps or not having a map to help to orientate.
Grouping the issues that have been commented are:
People had trouble to find the auditorium
Multiple rooms might have gotten people to not roam around
Refreshing pages was a struggle for some people, the stream seemed off
Pub and auditorium seemed like two disconnected rooms
Speaker's experience was good
Some people didn't even know about the event. A fact that may also contribute to fewer speakers this year.
This year, there was registration for access, and 325 people registered to attend and be part of the /dev/24.
Most registrations came from EMEA and the Americas, especially since the time frame of the event prioritize these two regions.
Roughly 39% of registrants are Liferay users (partners, customers and open source community). Our technical team represent the second largest audience of the event, with 38,5% of total registrations, as seen below:
We had an average of 31 connected people per session during the two days of the event. The two most watched talks were
"Increase portlet development productivity with Liferay code generator" with 44 viewers live and
"Live coding session" with 46 viewers live
/dev/24 proves again to be a source of knowledge and insight also after the event as, after two months, the video streams of the talks available on Youtube have reached more than 3,000 views. In comparison, video streams from them 2020 sessions, have reached 6,300 views only one year after the live event.
After finishing /dev/24 and with the feedback received, we have thought of some points that we would like to improve for next year, among which we indicate:
Think about multiple tracks
Add signs to indicate where to go
When on workadventure: Generate movement instead
to get more people to discover the event
Get LUGs involved earlier / during the whole year
Do you have any suggestions or feedback, please let us know in the comments.
And remember, all this information generated by the community and for the community, you have it available in the
web (with the links at the beginning of each session) and
descriptions of the 4 sessions that were done (session 1, session 2, session 3 and session 4).
See you in the next edition!