Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@liam-wiltshire
Created February 18, 2017 19:02
Show Gist options
  • Save liam-wiltshire/5c7e311f4cae1d7890a03715d371dd38 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save liam-wiltshire/5c7e311f4cae1d7890a03715d371dd38 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.

CFP Tracker

As (potential) speakers, we have a number of ways to track CFPs through the year - Joind.In, CallingAllPapers, Twitter Feeds and various other websites and sources.

However, as a rule these rely on the conference organisers submitting to the source you use, or tracking all the different sources. This probably results in us missing CFPs - having been speaking to fellow speakers at PHPUK this year, I certainly know I've missed a bunch of CFPs that I could have submitted to, but didn't know about them (particularly ones outside the #phpc)

As a second 'problem', I know I lose track of which CFPs I have and haven't submitted to (particularly if the conference doesn't use something like OpenCFP), and I know other speakers have similar problems...

A (potential) solution

As a community of speakers (regardless of technology), our combined knowledge of conferences in our area (both geographical and technical) would work for us all better if we could combine it.

So, I'm looking to build a crowdsourced database of CFPs, which doesn't rely on the conference organiser to submit to (although of course they can), but will also combine information from other sources and be open to submissions from speakers as well.

As a secondary feature, I'd like to allow speakers to have an account so they can 'check off' the conferences they have submitted to (and store a list of the talks they submitted if they so wish), so they can keep track of CFPs they have and havn't submitted to.

@heiglandreas
Copy link

That needs a new interface on the website where anyone can add a CfP and a second - admin - interface where allowed people can "sign" them off. Also CfPs need to be markeable as "not signed off". And the parser should not overwrite informations from a manually added CfP.

@liam-wiltshire
Copy link
Author

Yes, and that is where it could get tricky. We need to ensure we don't end up with duplicates, as that would totally kill it's usefulness, so we'll need to think about that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment