20:00:23 #startmeeting 20:00:23 Meeting started Wed Mar 31 20:00:23 2010 UTC. The chair is Hydroxide. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:00:23 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 20:00:26 <_hc> schultmc: thanks :) 20:00:28 hi all, thanks for being here 20:00:30 * edrz waves 20:00:37 <_hc> hello again 20:00:37 greetings fellow nerds :) 20:00:41 as per schultmc's remarks before the meeting we'll have the talks team item before the sponsorship item 20:00:59 #topic talks/contributions selection 20:00:59 evening 20:01:11 Hello World 20:01:31 so, the global team seems to have one idea so far about how we usually do talks selection, and the local team seems to have another. hopefully we can spend a few minutes and get everyone on the same page 20:01:37 can someone give a summary of the past process? 20:01:53 and then we'll have _hc explain the local team's ideas, and figure out what and when in a way that we can all get behind 20:02:06 moray? Ganneff? (if not, I will) 20:02:23 I didn't actually do it before AFAICR 20:02:26 ok 20:02:49 well we did a rating system in penta asynchronously, then had an IRC meeting where we hashed out an overall ranking and accepted everything above a certain ranking 20:03:04 that's a quick three-line summary. 20:03:28 personally, ideally we'd have some way that doesn't require physically being in or near NYC to do it, but the local team did have some good ideas that are a bit in conflict with that 20:03:35 _hc: over to you now to explain if you're ready 20:03:46 <_hc> ok 20:04:01 <_hc> I don't have the whole picture, but I have the overview 20:04:29 <_hc> basically, after the submission deadline has passed, we will all convene in person to sort thru all the submissions 20:04:41 <_hc> the aim is to do the whole thing in one big session of 8+ hours 20:05:05 <_hc> then come up with our suggestions and ranking and finalize things thru the internet 20:05:24 _hc: were you all still thinking of doing it as part of a weekend retreat? 20:05:52 <_hc> "weekend"... it might be a weekday night, depending on people's schedules 20:05:59 <_hc> hopefully it'll be a retreat somewhere nice 20:06:22 I like the huge amount of local energy, but unless you all plan to be this involved in the next several future non-NYC debconfs that would leave a paucity of experience going forward for things that don't need to be locally done. (especially when the local language isn't English) 20:06:24 <_hc> here's the doodle poll for the day, as it stands now: http://doodle.com/8r7tti238vnd8q2p 20:06:45 thoughts from others? 20:07:26 it seems like you could arrange this such that the local meeting isn't the *only* way for people to have input 20:07:33 without particularly changing your plans 20:07:39 inasmuch I like the physical thing, I agree with the paucity concerns 20:07:43 <_hc> to me, this kind of selection needs lots of discussion, and discussion is 10x slower via digital media 20:07:56 generally i agree with Hydroxide wrt both the great energy from localteam + need for experience between iterations of DC 20:08:01 _hc: this is Debian 20:08:15 <_hc> moray: meaning digital media is a requirement? 20:08:19 what about we do two passes? 20:08:23 _hc: pretty much 20:08:47 one first one with this workshop and then fine tune the middle ground with the whole team? 20:08:56 it seems you could get some non-NYC people to give input before your big meeting thing 20:08:58 (workshop == localteam meeting) 20:09:07 if it's just a matter of writing comments/scores on talks or whatever 20:09:17 moray: sure, the point system used previous years makes sense 20:09:19 additionally, there is the general concern, that when I have paid attention to DC confernces, there is more potential for harmony when local and global teams communicate with each other more. 20:09:20 <_hc> we haven't really finalized the process, but I think the idea is that we'd meet in person early on and come up with a rough selection, then finalize it via the internet 20:09:33 s/conferences/organization. 20:09:43 I wouldn't personally see a problem if the local meeting made the final decisions, but you'd need to arrange that with the non-locals on the team 20:09:51 but maybe to be safe: 20:10:00 -- non-locals (and others?) individually give input 20:10:02 -- big meeting 20:10:04 <_hc> I think can use the penta ratings stuff, but there would be a lot of in-person discussion leading to those ratings 20:10:07 yeah, so maybe (1) call on -team for everyone local and non-local to use penta to rank people, then (2) have the big localtalksteam retreat to do most of the work, then (3) enter it into penta, email -team to see if anyone has objections, then call it final 20:10:09 -- fine-tuning with everyone online? 20:10:39 * Hydroxide and moray are clearly thinking along similar lines :) 20:10:47 <_hc> so the resulting docusmentation of the process would be the same as before, more or less, but we'd be able to discuss in person more to figure out what we think :) 20:11:00 sure 20:11:24 though I can tell you that the biggest problem is people not giving any useful details about their proposed talks 20:11:40 a preview round to hassle people about that would be useful before your meeting 20:11:57 (maybe I did do this process before? hm, who knows) 20:12:36 _hc: ok, can we consider this agreed then? seems like the best of both worlds 20:12:43 a lot of people think that they are special and don't need give a useful abstract 20:13:00 and for DebConf, just rejecting people for that isn't necessarily helpful 20:13:09 votes++ for useful abstracts. 20:13:15 <_hc> Hydroxide: yes, I like your summary of it 20:13:19 ok 20:13:24 \o/ 20:13:25 <_hc> DrDub: you agree? 20:13:28 but not my identical one?? :/ 20:13:29 of course 20:13:37 <_hc> edrz: you too? 20:13:41 pretty much 20:13:46 #agreed local talks team will (1) call on -team for everyone local and non-local to use penta to rank people, then (2) have the big localtalksteam retreat to do most of the work, then (3) enter it into penta, email -team to solicit and address any objections, then call it final 20:13:57 moray: yours was harder to adapt into #agreed :) 20:14:00 great, thanks _hc 20:14:14 #topic travel sponsorship team 20:14:16 w/ the possible exception that decisions on some of the great(imho) ideas for new forms of contribution might be better chosen locally. 20:14:26 i.e. installations and such. 20:14:28 edrz: ya, that's compatible with what we just noted 20:14:39 schultmc: want to go ahead to give an update on the travel sponsorship team? 20:14:41 #link http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Teams 20:14:56 I've gathered 9 people (including myself) for the travel sponsorship team 20:15:02 Hydroxide: ok, it just makes more obvious the lack of non-NYC people even at this stage :p 20:15:04 I've updated the Teams wiki 20:15:09 Hydroxide: can you do an #agreed on talks for the minutes? 20:15:16 moray: hehe :) 20:15:19 edrz: I think I did 20:15:21 Hydroxide: and I was halfway through saying it before you jumped in! 20:15:27 Hydroxide: doh. sorry. you did. 20:15:34 schultmc: from your request for volunteers, I gathered you wanted no localteam there 20:15:39 moray: IRC client history buffer made it faster... 20:15:49 schultmc: therefore, I didn't volunteered, but I just wanted to clarify it with you 20:15:53 I'm planning on utilizing the rating system within penta for the initial rankings then scheduling an IRC meeting to make the decisions 20:16:12 DrDub: not no localteam, but the plan was to encourage outside volunteers 20:16:22 DrDub: you're welcome to volunteer if you'd like 20:16:46 schultmc: if you're taking all the volunteers, are they sensible ones so far? 20:17:00 moray: they seem sensible to me, based on that wiki page 20:17:15 moray: I recognized most of the names as sensible - there's only one that I don't recognize 20:17:23 schultmc: great, I'll send an e-mail then 20:17:37 Hydroxide: ok, hadn't seen the list was on the wiki 20:17:48 moray: it wasn't until recently :) 20:17:59 schultmc: is the current planned timeline feasible for your team? 20:18:29 Hydroxide: yes - only one team member expressed potential time concerns but we should still be able to make decisions in a timely manner 20:18:47 ok, cool 20:18:51 schultmc: how many more persons would you like to have? 20:18:55 ideally. 20:19:08 or is current + DrDub enough? 20:19:15 sounds enough 20:19:21 great 20:19:22 edrz: current + DrDub is enough 20:19:33 that'd make 10 like the RFH asked for 20:19:43 * edrz feeling good about this meeting :) 20:19:46 ok, great :) 20:19:50 #topic openday/debianday 20:19:59 we haven't really talked about openday/debianday much 20:20:03 but we know we want it to happen 20:20:32 s/much/at all, really/ 20:20:56 in the past it has been handled by a largely independent team, no? 20:21:06 ideally you want to get some outside people onto it 20:21:14 i.e. who are *not* trying to do the main conference events 20:21:20 i mean, not people primarilly responsible for DC-proper. 20:21:23 as it has a habit of getting lost as less important 20:21:39 exactly. 20:21:50 sounds good 20:22:06 what about more Free Culture type of crowd? 20:22:09 does anyone feel like they have a good idea of how to round up people with enough round tuits? 20:22:10 so, any volunteers and/or ideas from whence to solicit such? 20:22:23 biella FTW 20:22:36 obviously you need some kind of Debian angle on stuff, i.e. it should be DFSG clean as an event :) 20:22:42 nothing like skipping a meeting to be "volunteered" into smth ;-) 20:22:47 but exactly what goes on depends on the audience you want 20:22:54 I can certainly ask biella at tomorrow night's movie showing, though she's not exactly uninvolved in main-DC stuff 20:23:02 I'd try the NYC Resistor guys.... 20:23:11 you should decide if you do want Debian Day or an Open Day though 20:23:18 well, can we at least agree here on what the focus should be? 20:23:20 moray: what's the difference? 20:23:25 i.e. freestanding event or something as part of the main conference 20:23:25 I wonder if SFLC people would want to work on Debian Day ? 20:23:41 the original idea of the Open Day was to have talks of interest to both DebConf attendees and others then 20:23:43 MrBeige: that'd be awesome 20:23:48 and other softare freedom day involved people ? 20:23:51 rather than having a previously-traditional separate event 20:23:58 I'm vaguely in contact with BarCamp NYC guys 20:24:03 in terms of outreach, they'd be good 20:24:08 i'll reiterate a point i've made previously: it's is very difficult for videoteam to cover debianday if it occurs elsewhere than the main venue. 20:24:09 but from the groups you're mentioning it's more of a separate strand you're thinking of? 20:24:11 they can combine people outside of debian + inside of debian 20:24:33 in practical terms, there's also a security aspect 20:24:36 DrDub, MrBeige: most of those groups are great groups but the event wouldn't really be very debian-related 20:24:48 it's not great having lots of non-debconf-registered people wandering around the hacklabs! 20:25:00 Hydroxide: well, I was thinking more about bringing them in to do a Debian-related event 20:25:08 unless people want their luggage to be lighter on the way home 20:25:15 DrDub: to expand on what moray said, during dc9 we just made day 1 have some more generally-interesting talks and opened it more broadly 20:25:18 Hydroxide: so, give Debian a try and tell us what you think or stuff like that 20:25:19 DrDub: hence "open" day 20:25:34 Hydroxide: I like the day 1 thing 20:25:53 DrDub: previously it was at a separate venue, with much less ease of video-ing for the video team, and less well arranged, but meant to be more of a "here's what it is for the general public" event 20:25:55 Hydroxide: I don't like having it outside DC as the audience will lose the opportunity to mingle with the Debian attendance 20:25:57 Hydroxide: right, though in practice it ended up separated due to language 20:26:05 * Hydroxide nods at moray 20:26:08 not an issue this year 20:26:28 I'm partial to the "have it be part of day 1" idea 20:26:44 me too 20:26:50 then it's less to organize, except for advertising the general-public aspect of it, which would be the only additional team we would need to organize 20:26:54 it seems it might help energize the audience 20:26:56 which doesn't have to happen this early 20:27:09 Hydroxide: right 20:27:21 opening day is a Monday, although, no? 20:27:23 Hydroxide: though one minor disadvantage of this is breaking the "day 1 speech" type stuff a bit 20:27:29 anyone disagree? if not, we can consider it agreed (and I'll let moray do the #agreed) 20:27:39 DrDub, moray: we could do it on a different day of DebConf 20:27:44 DrDub: but, no, day 1 is usually a Sunday 20:27:47 DrDub: again, the better day depends on audience you want 20:27:54 including this year 20:28:00 some Debian Day / Open Day things before they hoped for lots of business types 20:28:10 (even if normally they didn't actually turn up ;) 20:28:20 (due to the bad advertising, fwiw) 20:28:35 v-t coverage is not a requirement, imho, i mention now just to put it into the minds of those making it happen once it's decided. 20:28:38 Hydroxide: (yes) 20:28:44 Sunday is optimal 20:28:58 I think Sunday is good too for the type of crowd we're likely to attract. 20:29:05 anyway, this really *is* a local matter, so it doesn't matter if you can't decide now 20:29:12 we can do opening speech early on the day 20:29:13 ok 20:29:20 then start the open day around 11 or noon 20:29:23 it's always been devolved to the local organisers to work out the audience and schedule etc. 20:29:50 #agreed we'll do Open Day as part of one of the normal DebConf days, not as a separate event. Most likely Day 1. Advertising and exact focus TBD later. 20:29:54 great 20:30:06 #topic registration numbers check 20:30:15 for the record, I didn't put this item in here :) but we have 230 registrants now 20:30:31 #info 230 registrants as of now 20:30:40 who did put it there, and was there a specific thing you wanted to address? 20:31:00 Hydroxide: it was me 20:31:11 just to have it noted 20:31:14 ok 20:31:15 at the moment just a single slope rather than jumps? 20:31:29 yeah, not nearly as high as I thought, though there are still about two more weeks left 20:31:29 i.e. not levelled off yet 20:31:43 Hydroxide: for dc7 a lot of extra people registered late 20:31:51 i guess some part of my mind had a vague notion there might be something to discuss related to that ... 20:31:57 moray: yeah, and that'll still probably happen 20:31:59 but what that was I haven't a clue at the moment 20:32:11 it's worth keeping track of them though 20:32:12 perhaps budget/sponsorship related stuff. 20:32:22 and getting the process in place for closing sponsored stuff at the right time 20:32:26 but, with regard to the sponsorship deadline, is it advisable to send another reminder between now and April 15, or would that be counterproductive? 20:32:27 normally that needs some fiddling 20:32:29 moray: yes 20:32:49 #action Hydroxide will make sure the technical stuff is in place to deal with the sponsorship deadline of April 15 20:32:51 Hydroxide: I'd do some kind of reminder a day or two before the final deadline, but not spammed to every list :) 20:32:53 oh, yeah. it was in relation to the registration reminder mail, etc. i think. 20:32:53 how many people want to stay with us? 20:32:56 just to see the impact. 20:33:15 moray: :) 20:33:19 a reminder mail might be helpful 20:33:35 it'd also be helpful to remind people to fill out the travel sponsorship stuff correctly 20:33:36 maybe debconf-announce as it's people who came before who are most likely to be blase about registering 20:33:47 people often get the fields reversed 20:33:51 right, separately from the reminder you need some data sanity checking 20:33:51 #action someone (not necessarily Hydroxide) will send a reminder email on April 13 or 14, trying to be judicious about which list(s) to send the reminder to 20:33:54 * Hydroxide nods at schultmc 20:34:05 there are *many* things people can get wrong, although penta does some checks now 20:34:23 MrBeige: can I task you with doing data sanity checking in $nearfuture? (I'll work with you to deal with the technical side as needed) 20:34:45 * edrz makes not to self to announce to his local LUGs ... meant to do that long ago already. :-/ 20:34:51 checking for people with zero as "amount requested" is the most significant for now though yes 20:34:55 edrz: yeah... 20:35:01 ok 20:35:17 #agreed sanity checking hould happen too (possibly by MrBeige and/or Hydroxide, possibly not) 20:35:20 ok 20:35:20 :) 20:35:23 Hydroxide: yes, it's been on my to-do list for a while 20:35:31 #action MrBeige will take the lead on that 20:35:33 great 20:35:39 #topic any other business 20:35:46 Any other business? I have one item 20:35:47 ok, for the first time since I"ve checked dc_view_numbers is updated 20:35:51 so I can proceed 20:35:52 MrBeige: woo 20:35:58 MrBeige: it's kind of fun, when you spot something weird then search and find 20 other people also did the same :) 20:36:05 (the sanity checking) 20:36:15 MrBeige: I think we did that during a local team meeting, IIRC :) the one with the heavy rainstorm 20:36:18 but 20:36:28 MrBeige: can you say here what Maria said about accommodations and children? 20:36:38 oh 20:36:57 (ideally with #info) 20:37:14 New York State law requires accommodations (such as theirs) holding children to have window guards, which they don't have installed 20:37:33 #info thus, no children under 13 can stay in columbia housing 20:37:36 * edrz shudders at reminder of rainstorm + consequences 20:37:59 makes me think of Mexico 20:38:07 #info some attendees have children under 13 they were/are planning to bring. we need to address this somehow 20:38:28 any thoughts on how? 20:38:40 Hydroxide: it would be perfectly reasonable to simply tell the people this situation with your sponsored housing 20:38:58 and provide info wrt alternatives. 20:39:05 moray: yeah. we don't have an easy way to identify them. maybe we should email #debconf-announce mentioning the hostels and hotels? 20:39:05 us letting children and hangers-on stay is nice if possible, but not a requirement 20:39:06 probably give recommendations on other nearby places 20:39:14 yeah. and children 13 or over are allowed 20:39:20 yes 20:39:37 we would like to discuss our team visit as well, but not sure if it fits into this contests or I should wait til the later 20:39:43 this isn't urgent yet, but yes it should go in an announcement at some point 20:39:52 who wants to prepare and send an email to debconf-announce? MrBeige is the most familiar with the options 20:39:54 somewhat related, h01ger had asked about cost for non-sponsored accompanying attendees 20:39:55 but I can do it itoo 20:39:56 AbsintheSyringe: just register for the conference and request travel sponsorship 20:39:59 wrt cost. 20:40:03 AbsintheSyringe: is there anything else to discuss? 20:40:05 did that get answered? 20:40:05 edrz: I think he got an answer IIRC 20:40:07 Hydroxide: I'd suggest combining it with another announcement 20:40:09 ook 20:40:10 ok 20:40:16 Hydroxide: well, though possibly not 20:40:21 MrBeige, yea, that's what I want to discuss 20:40:33 Hydroxide: since for this it's clear debconf-announce is enough, if you want until the day after sponsored registration closes 20:40:35 I managed to get 2.500$ per person, for 5 of us right now 20:40:38 Hydroxide: does it need an announcement? Did they previously think that tehy could bring their children so we have to be sure everyone gets updated? 20:40:44 MrBeige: some people did think that, yes 20:40:52 MrBeige: I can think of at least two or three examples 20:40:54 AbsintheSyringe: my point was there wasn't anything to discuss in a global team meeting. is there? 20:41:04 that covers among other thing travel costs, however the hting I'm most confused about is, are we going to stay on the campus during the conference or? 20:41:29 AbsintheSyringe: you register for the conference by teh deadline 20:41:40 moray: some people may decide that a hostel is not suitable and want to go to a hotel because of the kids, thus needing travel sponsorship 20:41:51 moray: so I'm not sure this should wait until after the sponsorship deadline. 20:41:53 AbsintheSyringe: and then you can stay where everyone stays, on campus, for free 20:42:20 #action MrBeige ensures some sort of followup regarding children staying on campus 20:42:23 AbsintheSyringe: that's pretty awesome. :) 20:42:26 MrBeige, yes, that's what I wanted to know ;) 20:42:30 Hydroxide: well, at the moment *no one* is promised accommodation 20:42:34 (re: travel amounts) 20:42:45 if we could get food and accommodation during conference 20:42:53 cool cool 20:42:58 edrz, right? :) 20:43:08 moray: true. anyway, this doesn't need to take additional meeting time IIRC, unless you think it does in which case go ahead 20:43:12 no 20:43:19 ok 20:43:25 other random point -- someone should check your Teams list against the Jobs page 20:43:28 ah 20:43:29 and see if things are missing 20:43:29 yes 20:43:36 well 20:43:47 we should make sure to at least say it when confirming sponsored accommodations 20:43:53 and those other kinds of automatic emails 20:43:54 MrBeige: yes 20:43:57 MrBeige, but what are you trying to say about the travel sponsorship, that we could get travel sponsorship as well, or you were talking about me? 20:43:59 moray: good point 20:44:30 and then perhaps combine a broadcast announcement with other things 20:44:38 on 13+ -- maybe add it to the penta page too? 20:44:44 AbsintheSyringe: this is a registration related question, can we discuss it after the meeting? 20:44:52 that + debconf-announce would cover it fine 20:44:57 moray: great point 20:45:06 MrBeige, sure 20:45:12 #action Hydroxide will add the "13+ in group lodging" bit to penta, the website, etc 20:45:22 anything else before "Next meeting"? 20:45:33 no :) 20:45:33 ...ok 20:45:36 #topic Next meeting 20:45:51 2 weeks or 3? 20:45:55 two weeks would be the day before April 15, so it's probably more logical to meet the week after 20:45:58 IMHO 20:46:10 localteam meets on 24th 20:46:13 right, as long as necessary stuff happens before then 20:46:17 which is 3+ weeks 20:46:18 and May 1 is a talk submission deadline 20:46:35 so 4 weeks could happen if you want to have the localteam meeting in between 20:46:39 thoughts? 20:46:41 international workers day!? 20:46:54 oh 20:47:08 heh 20:47:11 4 weeks would be Apr 28 20:47:16 you were not talking about meeting on May 1st 20:47:20 I was not 20:47:22 Apr 28 sounds good 20:47:43 everyone ok with April 28? it seems optimal to me too 20:47:48 it poerhaps would be good to have at least a brief global meeting before local to address anything we need to be sure to discuss locally. 20:48:11 Hydroxide: ok if some status dumps go the list at close of sponsorship, etc. 20:48:31 heh, I was thinking of the reverse thing where it would be good to be able to go local->global (after today's we should be sure to do global->local) 20:48:54 beyond that, seeing as I'm about the only global person pushing things in meetings, and I'm on IRC always anyway, ... ;) 20:49:00 :) 20:49:09 global->local->global was my thought. 20:49:21 but it all get circular eventually. 20:49:31 glglglglglglglugglugglug 20:49:35 can we have the earlier global be shorter? 20:49:36 here's one: are people OK with next global meeting on the 28th, but some status-checking reports and queries on the -team list between 15 and 24th? 20:49:45 ah 20:49:49 it is not a meeting 20:49:50 good 20:49:58 Y 20:50:01 ok 20:50:03 DrDub: i think so. 20:50:12 #agreed next global meeting on the 28th, but some status-checking reports and queries on the -team list between 15 and 24th 20:50:15 thanks all! 20:50:20 #endmeeting