Paper submitted, and what happens next

[Joe Gibbs Politz]

You all should have received a message earlier this evening: I submitted the paper, so it's in on time.  I'm merging in Redex changes from the paper repo to the mainline repo and making sure all's well there, and I'll tag our submission code when that's done.

First and foremost, thanks to everyone for all your work on this project so far, and great job!  I've learned a lot about Python, interpreters, and semantics, and we've built something pretty cool, despite rough edges and obstacles along the way.

Here's what happens next (outlined at http://splashcon.org/2013/cfp/618, please read so you know what's going on)

- We'll get reviews back on May 25.  If the paper gets rejected, we'll deal with resubmitting somewhere else when that happens.  Otherwise, the committee will either accept completely, or it will conditionally accept, which means they'll ask us to clear up confusion/address parts of the work that they didn't find satisfactory.  In our case, this will likely be in the form of more tests or features.  The revisions would be due by July 20, and the final response would come back on July 29.

- If we get accepted (conditionally or not), there is an Artifact Evaluation Committee for OOPSLA 2013 that evaluates the quality of software artifacts that accompany submissions.  That means we'll submit lambda-py to a committee, who will give the software a score for how well it holds up to the claims in the paper, represents a useful result, etc.  The artifact submission will likely be at the end of July, though the date isn't announced.

In all cases, it helps us to keep working on lambda-py: if we resubmit somewhere else then better results won't hurt, if we get conditionally accepted we may have already addressed their concerns, and if we get accepted we'll be in better shape for having the artifact evaluated.  I would really like to have us do a stellar job on the artifact evaluation if we get in; we should be able to put together a really compelling submission.

We by no means need to work at the same pace we have been the past few weeks, and everyone should slow down and relax!

However, once we've all taken a nice break, we should keep making things better in the coming weeks and months.  In particular, we should see if we can address performance problems to make developing and testing a little more pleasant, and get to many of the cleanups we haven't had time for.  This might make adding even substantial new features much more palatable.

That's all for now, thanks all for all the great work!

Joe

[Anand Chitipothu]

Awesome job Joe and the team!

Anand

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lambda-py" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lambda-py+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
Anand
http://anandology.com/

[Alejandro Martinez]

Congratulations!

Can you post a link to the final pdf?

2013/3/29 Anand Chitipothu <anand...@gmail.com>

--
Alejandro.

[Joe Gibbs Politz]

http://cs.brown.edu/~joe/private/48539327-1305-4de6-b345-06fc35a4c865.pdf

If you notice anything you think we should keep track of and change for the final version, feel free to make issues on the lambda-py-paper repo.

I think sections 2-4 could still be clearer, in particular.