Geeks With Blogs

Charles Young
Jason Morris called it ‘decompression’.   After 10 months of planning and three packed days of presentations here in San Jose, Rules Fest 2010 is now in ‘boot camp’ mode. More than half the attendees stayed for today’s sessions, and are currently spread between four boot camps – JBoss Rules, IBM JRules, OpenRules and Jess. My role as MC and catwalk model (don’t ask!) came to an end last night, and I am sitting in my hotel room, shattered, happy, but also with a distinct feeling of the ‘bends’ as I emerge blinking into the warm Californian sunshine.
We are really happy with the way this year’s conference has gone. These are constrained times, economically, and we needed to prove the viability of the event and the ability of new management, and a new owner, to organise and host an international conference that provides real benefit to its attendees and sponsors. The post mortem will begin in earnest in a few days, and knowing our committee, will be a frank, open and critical appraisal of the last few days. However, we hit our targets, substantially grew the event from last year, garnered great feedback, had a really excellent line-up of speakers and all enjoyed the occasion immensely.
Rules Fest will strive to deepen its commitment to provide a technical conference ‘for developers, by developers’. As I tried to explain to one bemused non-Microsoft person yesterday, we aim to be the ‘PDC’ of the rules processing world, and refuse to be just another trade show. Next year, we will evolve the program to provide deeper developer content and more opportunity for rules developers to share their experience and get direct input into the issues they face. We plan to significantly increase the attendance again (we learned so much this year about how to market it, and are confident that we can hit significantly higher targets next year), attract wider sponsorship and broaden the pool of presenters.
My one on-going pain point is the lack of a really good .NET story. Now don’t get me wrong. I love the Java and C/C++ guys/gals to bits, but I really, really want to see the .NET developers who turn up to the event get more for their money.  Mark Proctor quizzed me on my interest in the event last night (and immediately provided a litany of answers to his own questions!). I understand why he is a bemused. Where are the .NET rule vendors? Everyone else is there.  Where were you, InRule?   We tried to get you interested. Where were you, Microsoft (I know Karl would have loved to be there, as he has been in previous years)?   And Dan, can’t we get IBM to push ILOG.NET a bit more?   I said to Mark that at some point, the .NET rule logjam has to break, and I fully intend to be there when it does.   Rules belong to businesses, not to the JRE.   .NET developers do rules as well!
Big thanks to the team at the Hayes Mansion. Inga, you are an absolute star! Big thanks to Brenda who helped make the event a success.   And big, big thanks to Jason and Brian who never lost faith.
Posted on Thursday, October 14, 2010 7:23 PM | Back to top

Comments on this post: Coming up for Air: Rules Fest 2010

# re: Coming up for Air: Rules Fest 2010
Requesting Gravatar...
Thanks Peter. Yes, we allowed ourselves a few minutes of smugness last night.
Left by Charles Young on Oct 14, 2010 7:46 PM

# re: Coming up for Air: Rules Fest 2010
Requesting Gravatar...
I am jealous and sad that I could not be part of it this year.
I am glad to see (well hear at least!) how things evolved from last year.
Good job to you as well.
Hope to be there next year!
Left by Eric on Oct 15, 2010 8:21 PM

# re: Coming up for Air: Rules Fest 2010
Requesting Gravatar...
Congrats Charles - indeed it was a v useful event in my book.

In terms of "show the code" and "show the .NET code", I do wonder the importance of that. If I show a TIBCO ruleset, is that syntax interesting to the other rule users? Surely pseudo code, dare I say it in some std syntax like PRR or maybe a future RIF PRD convenience syntax, might be what people can relate to (across products and platforms, irrespective of (MDA)PSM?)

Cheers and thanks again,
Left by Paul Vincent on Oct 15, 2010 10:57 PM

# re: Coming up for Air: Rules Fest 2010
Requesting Gravatar...
We have an on-going tension here. We are determined to prevent marketing of specific products ‘from the podium’ and to keep the focus on technical content. Hence, whenever someone demonstrates anything that is product-specific, there is a chorus of disapproval. Another related issue, as you rightly imply, is that demonstration of product-specific syntax is a barrier to those who use other rule engines. I think, though, that a balance can be struck here. We want content that is relevant and useful to the conference as a whole. In reality, there is enough commonality between a wide range of rule engines to mean that patterns, techniques, experience and even code ‘translate’ fairly well.
I think our biggest issue this year was that the event was not quite big enough to allow us to go multi-track at any point, or to offer much in the way of breakouts. For my money, I’d like to see a more rounded agenda with a smaller number of plenary sessions, and, say, a third of the time given to breakouts. Some of the feedback we got during the conference is that plenaries are a really good thing, and I’m not arguing for a dramatic change to the format, but simply that we provide more scope for smaller sessions where people can interact, where product-specific content is not a problem to the attendees and where people can opt into sessions that cover specific areas. To allow this, we need, obviously, to attract more presenters, more sponsorship and more attendees.
Left by Charles Young on Oct 16, 2010 12:52 PM

Your comment:
 (will show your gravatar)

Copyright © Charles Young | Powered by: