19:59:53 #startmeeting 19:59:53 Meeting started Mon Jan 19 19:59:53 2015 UTC. The chair is marga. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:59:53 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 19:59:58 #topic Roll Call 19:59:59 . 20:00:01 * madduck 20:00:02 ciao 20:00:03 Hey everybody, please say hi so we know you are there 20:00:08 hi 20:00:09 hi 20:00:12 We have quite a bunch of items in the agenda, please try to stay on topic so that we can cover as many as possible. 20:00:13 Hi 20:00:14 hola 20:00:17 https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf15/Germany/Minutes/2015-01-19#Agenda 20:00:20 hola 20:00:31 jelou 20:00:32 hi. 20:00:34 #topic Summit status regarding DC15 20:00:41 RichiH, cate: what's the status of the DC15 summit instance? 20:00:46 <_rene_> guddn abend 20:01:23 * cate has a working playground summit. I think Ganneff finished to install a team testing version 20:01:32 the server is provisioned, my last status is that apache etc are not yet installed 20:01:46 What are the next steps? 20:01:46 i don't know its address, credentials, or anything 20:02:07 I'm understanding more and more summit, so I think we can really open CfP and short registration by 1 feb 20:02:20 cate++ 20:02:27 That's great 20:02:38 hi! 20:02:43 also, mmgc84 is new, wants to help, and has django/summit/css skills/interest 20:02:52 [and because I broke the public version, I can ev. test also on the public version] Broke: now it point to non opened dc15 pages 20:02:55 * mmgc84 yellows everyone. For those who dont know me my name is Marcelo Gutierrez and I am the 7 of clubs in the debian deck of cards, my first appearance was DC11, sorry I am using webchat and might appear as anonymous 20:03:03 ho 20:03:13 cate, that includes making summit multiconference? 20:03:31 cate, RichiH: have you guys considered multi-conference? what will happen to the dc14 instance? how will dc16 integrate? or is this for "then" and we just do dc15 for now? 20:03:44 maxy: summit is already multiconference. In facts it has only 3 data not conference specific 20:03:49 IIRC the multiconference part was already working 20:04:03 madduck: if all else fails, we can have two vms run; we will need to verify what works and what does not 20:04:09 cate: and we can add/modify fields later and not have previous years affected? 20:04:22 CfP takes precedence over multiconference, but we need multiconference 20:04:30 madduck: yes. It works 20:04:32 But the DC14 version was not multiconference? Or why are we provisioning a new instance? 20:04:33 Good, we can probably use a mini conf for a test ride. 20:04:50 marga: in part for testing 20:04:53 marga: we have not a new instance 20:05:08 cate: she means the new server 20:05:13 cate, I thought that was what RichiH meant 20:05:50 btw, marga asked me to start https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Summit#DC15_wishlist and I did, but the dates and prios in there are not meant to be authoritative. Feel free to use or delete (I won't be angry) 20:05:51 marga: depending on how well the multiconference support comes along, either we can tear down the test machine afterwards, or we can use it for dc15 20:05:56 that is unclear as of yet, though 20:06:10 ok 20:06:27 I'd like to have a clear plan of what needs to happen between now and Feb 1st 20:06:32 Do we have that? 20:07:03 not yet, but i have been working with cate to get there. any wishlist items are also welcome 20:07:21 #link https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Summit#DC15_wishlist 20:07:30 https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Summit probably needs a cleanup. I can help with that, although I don't want to intrude. 20:08:16 #info Things are progressing and it looks possible that we could be able to open CfP+registration on Feb 1st, although there's not a clear path to get there yet 20:08:22 madduck: as long as you keep -infra in the loop, any input is welcome 20:08:34 what's -infra? a mailing list? IRC? 20:08:39 I'd like an action point for next monday? 20:09:26 how about "continue to work on the whole thing and have the wiki page cleared up so the team knows where we stand?" 20:09:49 * madduck holds up 60 second sign 20:09:50 That seems a bit unclear 20:10:26 But ok, let's move on then. 20:10:29 action richih and cate clean up the wiki, assign tasks, and keep -team informed 20:10:32 We will update the wiki, but many wishlist (on bottom) are long term wishes 20:10:41 #action richih and cate clean up the wiki, assign tasks, and keep -team informe 20:10:42 of course, thise kinda depends on receiving a working test server 20:10:52 next 20:10:55 #topic Data to request from attendees 20:11:00 cate has created a dump of the current fields in summit (they are a lot): 20:11:04 https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Summit/Data 20:11:15 The question is if we need any other info from attendees at the opening of registration. 20:11:58 I'd like to actually reduce the number of bursaries related fields. 20:12:11 but cate and I can discuss that offline 20:12:14 Every team should check own area of compentence, to see if we have all information, if we ask too much, or if we should update fields 20:12:15 Yeah, I agree that it was a bit too much 20:12:23 ok 20:12:28 #action cate and bremner to discuss reducing bursaries-related fields 20:12:55 cate: can you send an email pertaining to this with a deadline? 20:12:58 #agreed Every team should check their own area of competence to see if we have all we need, if we ask too much or we need to update the fields. 20:13:00 Important are accommodation, food and price related stuffs 20:13:32 [e.g. people should know if they should ask for sponsorship or not] 20:14:04 rmayorga already started the discussion in content team, on the questions 20:14:07 if we open reg this early and we might add fields later, we should make sure people are okay with being emailed about news… there's a TODO item about this. Maybe make it opt-in/-out 20:14:16 cate, that's for content, which is the next topic 20:14:25 cate: yes, but I think that is part of the next topic 20:14:28 marga: :) 20:14:55 i have a few suggestions for additional (optional) fields, but those are not urgent and can be added in may or so 20:14:59 madduck, can you phrase that into a # ? 20:15:03 madduck: yes we debated that in the past; a "i agree that i will be sent important updates; we promise not to abuse this" boilerplate would be good 20:15:11 RichiH: exactly 20:15:32 #agreed we should reserve the right to ping registered people by email about changes/news and make sure to get their consent early. 20:15:44 - #agreed all registrations need to confirm that they are willing to receive important updates 20:15:49 but yours works as well 20:15:50 * madduck holds up 60 seconds sign 20:15:54 #topic Data to request in talk submissions 20:16:01 This is the same, but for talks. The talk fields are already in the dump. As I understand it, content team was discussing this. Are there any changes from last year? 20:16:11 just a few 20:16:20 removing some options for the "type" of the events 20:16:31 multiple speakers and generally displaying all speakers more prominently and hiding participants (at least from public view) 20:16:41 And I forgot to add the "tracks" part. I think the tracks should be defined before CfP, right? 20:16:53 at dc14 it was annoying that in the schedule, you did not see who was actually presenting 20:16:56 you had to click on the event 20:17:05 cate: we can define a default set of tracks, later on create more if need it 20:17:08 cate: probably, but I'm not sure it has been discussed yet 20:17:08 Well, it depends on how content wants to go about it, it's certainly one way 20:17:14 madduck: could you add it in the TODO 20:17:21 cate: there already 20:17:34 we should definitely make sure we are open to changes later on, esp. regarding tracks 20:17:34 I'll send an email with this info later this day, -team is the right place? 20:17:40 or we should send it to infra? 20:17:41 we might want to change the tracks we offer 20:18:04 e.g. if we receive only 2 submissions for Foo, then maybe it can be fused with Bar and the two called Far instead? … etc. 20:18:05 marga: last year we create the tracks at the very end of the process 20:18:14 also, some tracks may be formed on the fly 20:18:18 right 20:18:20 tracks are also conference specific, so ev. someone should copy the past one 20:18:25 according to the proposals received 20:18:40 generally, the CfP *does* propose a few "topics" though, which are like the tracks, or general focus points of the conf 20:19:06 yes, that can be part of the CfP drafting, and easy to keep on summoit 20:19:40 #agreed content team might start with an initial set of tracks (also included as suggestions in the cfp), but summit should be able to handle later changes 20:19:41 #agreed Possibly the CfP could include suggestion for focus areas (that will later be turned into tracks) 20:19:48 :) 20:19:51 sorry! ;) 20:20:02 i prefer marga's version 20:20:05 pfffff 20:20:11 there is no way back RichiH 20:20:16 they complement each other 20:20:16 we have both now :) 20:20:20 #action rmayorga to send the email with the changes to the fields to debconf-team@ 20:20:29 #topic Status update on network connection in Heidelberg 20:20:30 rmayorga: are you available after meeting? 20:20:33 There's work going on regarding conecting the venue to the University fiber, this is mainly to ask what's going on. 20:20:33 RichiH? 20:20:35 aye 20:20:36 cate: yes 20:20:37 looking good 20:20:51 i poked all parties involved 20:21:06 and? 20:21:18 the university is clear. it's not yet fully through internally, but for all intents and purposes, that is OKed 20:21:41 the fiber through the zoo is planned to be finished within february 20:22:19 RichiH: There's the idea of a site visit in Feb (more on that later); would it be useful if (someone from) infra came along? 20:22:30 the youth hostel didn't get back to me yet, but given the distance and that it's single-mode, we can easily just toss a cable over the balcony if things are really not in shape 20:22:39 but i suspect the last mile also be done by then 20:22:42 the youth hostel wrote to me today about this 20:22:53 ah, good 20:22:58 what did they write? 20:23:00 Bezüglich LWL versucht Herr Hartmann gerade konkrete Infos von Uni und Zoo zu bekommen, wann der 20:23:03 "Lückenschluss" vollzogen werden kann. Der Arbeitsaufwand auf unserem Gelände ist sehr gering, 20:23:05 RichiH, I thought the cable through the zoo was there already and we only needed the last 10 m or so? 20:23:06 sodass wir das unkompliziert realisieren können, sobald der Zoo vorgelegt hat. 20:23:19 marga: no 20:23:28 basically they are saying they will need little time after the zoo completes 20:24:05 marga: nah, we are the reason the zoo director approved funding for it now, rather than "in the future", as far as I understood it ;) 20:24:14 correct 20:24:31 also, in part, that they want their new entrace's PoS terminal to have "proper" network 20:24:34 Alright, I'm a bit confused about this, but fine. 20:24:42 RichiH: I have it in my guts that we (you) should stay in close contact with them just to make sure things progress. Not too close… 20:24:53 marga: we'll explain post-meeting or another day if that's alright. 20:24:54 marga: the important bit is that everything looks to be finished _way_ ahead of time 20:24:55 #info Things are progressing well enough, no blockers in sight to have the network connection ready 20:25:10 #topic Prices for the conference and how we'll handle non-sponsored attendees 20:25:15 RichiH: so, site visit in Feb? We won't have much flexibility on the date, but…? 20:25:16 This was somewhat discussed on-list, there was some agreement, but of course not on all points. 20:25:16 Points where there was not agreement: a) reducing the fees a little bit; b) having a semi-sponsored category c) having some token of appreciation for people that give us money. I suggest we try to go point by point. 20:25:25 a) 500 USD today is 430 EUR. Even if the difference gets smaller, I still feel it's wrong to charge 500 EUR for something that was less than 400 EUR last year. 20:25:28 RichiH: let me know by privmsg 20:26:12 marga: forex rates can't be compared like that though. 20:26:15 corporate was 1000eur in spain and banja luka 20:26:28 I may be floating in dreamland but 500 € is definitely fine for corporate in .de 20:26:33 and even 200 € is fine 20:26:40 i remember linuxtag charging 200 € or so, no? 20:26:41 And how many were there? We had over 20 at 500 USD 20:26:49 madduck: debconf is not only targetting .de 20:27:14 we could offer tickets for $500 and €500 20:27:19 how about we say 200/500 suggested, but you pay what you feel is right? 20:27:34 i really believe very strongly that we should try a pay-what-you-want with a given base level 20:27:36 RichiH: i don't think USD-earners are our problem 20:27:50 forget the base level; just give suggestions. 20:28:03 if we want at least, say, €500, but someone has the budget to buy a €2000 ticket 20:28:06 we should let them 20:28:07 madduck: makes it harder for people to expense claim 20:28:09 madduck: if that works for you? :-) 20:28:16 No, for companies (like Google) they want to see the webpage saying "it's �X00" 20:28:16 and we print the badges in varying colours on a spectrum and let people compare hues ;) 20:28:30 bremner: really? they could just go with the suggestion. 20:28:41 but I agree with bremner that it's not good for claiming expenses 20:28:49 madduck: no differently-colored badges 20:29:14 so we could do that for 200€ 20:29:17 the prof i mean 20:29:29 We could have another category 20:29:30 bremner, hug: my sugesstion is to either provide tickets at, say 500, 750, 1000, 1500, 2000 etc pp 20:29:39 Which is pay-what-you-want 20:29:40 or to offer a site where you enter, say, 2000, and save that 20:29:45 So, Prof, Corp, Donator 20:29:47 Or whatever 20:29:56 you get a link which clearly states "a ticket is €2000" and you can forward that internally 20:30:13 seems complicated :-) 20:30:18 * madduck holds up 60 seconds sign 20:30:25 hug: _on top_ of everything else 20:30:26 does it work to have micro-sponsorship? amounts above EURX get a hug from madduck? 20:30:27 abd there were never many corporates 20:30:33 * RichiH takes the sign from madduck 20:30:44 are differentiating between the two in terms of invoices only for the higher price? 20:30:50 I think CCC did that 20:30:51 marga: let's postpone this discussion to next meeting with more time 20:30:54 Anyway, we don't seem to get agreement on this one... 20:31:02 so, mailing list? 20:31:03 b) The semi-sponsored category is something similar to the "only food" or "only lodging" categories that we've had, but simplifying it for attendees: they'll get the full pack without having to worry about coordinating things, and they have a simple round number for paying. 20:31:23 Is there anything wrong with doing this instead of the only-food/only-accom category? 20:31:36 marga: i think those are very good arguments 20:31:55 marga: why don't you like the option that they just pay their part at the reception? 20:31:56 bremner, what do you think with your bursaries' hat? 20:32:13 hug, they'll still do that 20:32:25 marga: It's fine. 20:32:29 hug, it's just how we'll handle the registration. 20:32:34 and registratation still needs to know the exaxt dates 20:33:04 hug, sure, but we always need that, so what's the point? 20:33:09 hug: paying on site eats time 20:33:19 e.g. what do you pay if you only come for 2 days... 20:33:25 hug: is there an advantage which you see? 20:33:55 hug, ok, my thinking was that if you only come 2 days, you pay for your stay (70 EUR) and that's it. 20:34:32 Whereas if you come for the whole week, you'd need to pay 300 EUR, which is noticeably more, and so you ask for half sponsorship 20:35:14 I do see your point, but for us it makes it more complicated because people prices are food+accom 20:35:47 yeah, I agree that it's easier if food+accom are combined 20:36:08 but some people are logging outside the venues 20:36:15 mainly the corporate and locals 20:36:22 Will there be differently sized/prized rooms as with debconf13 or is all the same? 20:36:27 Yes, I know, we need to have the food price for those. 20:36:58 noshadow, there are rooms from 2 to 6 people. 20:36:58 could we have the food be folded into registration? 20:37:04 I think that is rather usual 20:37:11 no! please! 20:37:29 do we have the option to only book accom without food? 20:37:34 I don't think anyone wants to go the DC13 route. 20:37:37 cate: if you sleep somewhere else, wouldn't it be kind of assumed that you do not need sponsorship? 20:37:38 please don't mix up professional registion etc with food and accom 20:37:57 RichiH: locals people 20:37:59 _unless_ you sleep at someone else's place nearby and still need food. but in this case... just talk to us 20:38:02 mostly volunteers 20:38:23 well, do we have the option to only book food but not accom? 20:38:30 RichiH, we will need to figure it out, there will be people in that situation. But this goes beyond sponsoring or not sponsoring. We need to know how much that is. 20:38:35 cate: if they apply for food, no sleeping, and half-sponsored, we can special case them, no? 20:38:45 marga: aye 20:38:52 right 20:38:52 I think we are discussing too many things at the same time 20:39:13 #agreed Having a half-sponsored category makes sense, but there are still a lot of details to be worked out. 20:39:14 so one thing I'd like to discuss (later?) is sponsorship for volunteers 20:39:20 I swear I'm trying to follow, but it is hard :-/ 20:39:25 Let's move on. 20:39:26 c) Regarding the token of appreciation, there were mixed feelings. This is something that we did in DC8, but I think it was never done after that. I think it could possibly make a difference in how people perceive paying for their stay. What are the reasons not to do it? 20:39:37 * MeanderingCode here, reading backlog 20:40:25 marga, giving gifts would be ok, but not something that people would be recognizable 20:40:46 Right, no colored badges 20:40:49 marga: people on the list seemed to thing that it singled out people with plain badges as freeloaders (paraphrasing wildly) 20:41:00 Yeah, yeah, no colored badges 20:41:27 My thoughts had been: stickers for payment-of-cost and mugs for prof/corp 20:41:28 hug: food without accom is possible, yes 20:41:47 marga: seems cheap and decent enough, yes 20:41:48 (I asked that) 20:41:51 marga: sounds fine, as long as the stickers are nice 20:42:07 bremner: ideally, they would be the same which you can buy as well, no? 20:42:08 :) 20:42:15 marga, could those items be also available for sell? 20:42:23 aand probably you may want to make those also available to be sell during the conference 20:42:28 tassia, I think it would make sense, yes 20:42:29 RichiH, exactly 20:42:34 as else, you will have people using them (well, duh) and it ends up being similar to colored badges 20:42:52 beer tokens to cate and corporate 20:43:03 RichiH: that is whay I said, if I see someone using a cool mug and I see it on sale on Front Desk 20:43:10 #agreed We can provide a small token of appreciation as long as it's not too much, nothing like a colored badge, and possibly also have it for sale 20:43:14 cate is trying to cate-inject 20:43:32 I'll just assume this people buy it from there instead of having a different status on the registraton part 20:43:35 Ok, at least in this one we agreed :) 20:43:40 #topic DebCamp Sprints 20:43:47 i think cate was trying to say "beer tokens for jcristau" 20:43:48 This was discussed between yesterday and today. I'm sorry if my message was not clear. The goal was not to prevent people from attending DebCamp, but rather to make DebCamp much more productive for everyone. 20:43:48 Have the questions been cleared by now, is there anything else that needs to be discussed about this? 20:43:51 if someone wants a beer instead of a mug for paying us €200/500, i will buy that beer myself 20:44:25 marga: i think you should summarize and #agreed what was discussed 20:44:34 just so there are no surprises down the line 20:44:41 Do we have limits on debcamp partecipation (venue limits, max or min)? 20:44:44 For DebCamp? 20:45:05 yes 20:45:20 there are 80 beds reserved 20:45:35 We might be able to change that with enough advance notice, right? 20:46:01 80 seems enough (but maybe for friday) 20:46:28 we have 250 on friday 20:46:33 #info As discussed on list, the idea is to encourage sprints to encourage team work, having tasks already thought out, and possibly get good results. 20:46:36 marga: yes 20:47:02 i think that the stuff people plan to work on should be public for everyone to see, anonymous if wanted 20:47:25 this (a) forces people to not just write something, and (b) might actually foster collaboration 20:47:28 just an idea 20:47:31 yah, public by default, secret on request sounds sane 20:47:39 should we ask DPL for sprints debian money? 20:47:48 lucas: should we? 20:47:51 #info It wouldn't be compulsory to participate in a sprint. 20:48:17 cate, I don't think so... Maybe if we are running out of money and the sprints are in danger of not happening otherwise? 20:48:18 cate, RichiH: we have not asked DPL for any money beyond a starting loan, let's not do too many things at once 20:48:23 madduck: are you talking about what people write in their sponsorship request? 20:48:28 but should we require a debcamp plan to all people, right? 20:48:41 we always have 20:48:47 cate, yes, as always. For some people it will just be "Participate in Sprint X" 20:48:48 bremner: no, about what they write in their application to be accepted to debcamp, and this is not meant to sound harsh. 20:49:01 marga: defaulting to self-funded is good, yes 20:49:07 madduck: who decides who is accepted to debcamp? 20:49:16 bursaries? 20:49:23 a sub-team of content? 20:49:27 I think in the past everyone was accepted 20:49:28 anyone really? 20:49:35 yeah, accept everyone basically 20:49:39 marga: no, definitely not 20:49:40 just as long as they wrote something that's public ;) 20:49:43 Oh, ok. 20:49:56 we rejected plenty of "unknown" people for debcamp 20:49:58 bremner: share some historical info? 20:50:13 marga, even just "Participate in Sprint X" should be followed by context, no? 20:50:16 #idea Maybe make the DebCamp plan field public, so that people can know what others are working on, even if it's not a sprint. 20:50:17 i do very much like the idea of establishing a culture for the future which makes funding (and maybe even content acceptance decisions) include past performances 20:50:36 I'm not sure if content is interested in handling this. 20:50:46 otherwise risk having people not related to teams saying they would work with teams 20:50:55 maxy: it's a longer process and it would be in bursaries 20:51:06 madduck: not exclusively as you would end up being selecting in favour of oldtimers, but as one factor, yes 20:51:09 tassia: You mentioned that coordination should handle it, right? 20:51:17 we could encourage the sprints to have a wiki page with attendees and a work plan 20:51:18 tassia, I don't think that's bad at all. 20:51:21 tassia: and if they do and then don't deliver, in the future we'll consider that… 20:51:22 maybe the proposals of sprints could take care of participants? 20:51:46 how about sprint plans on wiki, people can link from their bursaries application? 20:52:04 Yeah, that makes sense 20:52:08 marga, it is ok to have newbies, but we need context 20:52:11 bremner: fine if we think random people should be allowed to submit to part of sprint 20:52:18 bremner: good idea. 20:52:31 in some cases "Participate in Sprint X" wouldn' t be enough for the evaluation I think 20:52:34 tassia: they should get a say, but not decide on their own 20:53:17 #idea Sprints should be planned in a wiki, including a work plan. People can link that wiki from their DebCamp plant 20:53:21 plan :) 20:53:24 maxy, I was talking about coord dealing with the issue of sprints, if we didn't reach consensus (but I think we did) 20:53:27 can't we simply agree that we a) want to default to public info and b) require people to give context and a rough work plan? 20:54:00 and we even encourage "singles" to write about their plans publicly (blog, whatever) so that everyone gets a better feel of what everyone else expects from debcamp 20:54:01 if a total newbie wants in, yes, we will need some more info 20:54:03 I'm just wondering whether the sprints' participants should be on the wiki or not? 20:54:32 this is looking a lot like lca miniconfs in ways, in that maybe it should be left to each sprint to handle? 20:54:41 but if bremner writes in, saying he needs on-site time to improve the mentoring process, what more info do we need? 20:54:44 azeem, I think they need to be, so that we can plan for space, and who ever is in charge of the sprint can coordinate correctly the tasks and so on. 20:54:55 madduck, I agree the sprints could handle participation 20:55:01 Alright, I think we reached agreement 20:55:07 marga: we'll find space. you can quote me on that. 20:55:10 right, sprint should be largely self-organized 20:55:15 there is plenty of public space too people can use. 20:55:20 madduck: but who approves mini-confs for LCA? 20:55:30 azeem: conf committee 20:55:36 they are very similar to talks 20:55:52 #agreed Sprints as an idea are agreed. We'll let sprints self-organize as much as possible, but keeping information public, so that others know what's going on. 20:55:53 it's *hard* to get approved, there are limited slots 20:55:59 hum... this I don't agree 20:56:03 maybe we can get there in a few years if we want, but that's too ambitious now 20:56:04 what part? 20:56:26 as LCA about the approval of sprints 20:56:33 ah, ok, I think that was just a comment 20:56:34 it seems that we'll be more flexible, right? 20:56:40 tassia: yeah 20:56:42 Yes 20:56:47 great ;-) 20:56:56 #topic Webpage needed: How to reach Heidelberg 20:57:00 just saying it might be a model we'll want in X years, tassia 20:57:06 we'll see. I don't have an agenda here ;) 20:57:11 good 20:57:14 This page is for people planning their trips. 20:57:15 ah, another point: you can not organize more than one sprint per time X 20:57:16 _rene_: didn't you want to do this? 20:57:24 _rene_, I was wondering if you might be interested :) 20:57:31 RichiH: I would not make this a hard requirement. EOT 20:57:32 to avoid blanket creation of "sprints" 20:57:33 <_rene_> yep 20:57:51 _rene_, can I action you on this? :) 20:57:56 madduck: i would. YOLO 20:58:02 <_rene_> didn't get round to it yet - real life issues, but.. 20:58:08 <_rene_> didn't we already last time? 20:58:20 _rene_, I think we agreed on something else :) 20:58:29 #action _rene_ to create the "Getting to Heidelberg" page 20:58:34 <_rene_> I always thought this was included in "getting to", not only HD->Venue, but e.g. FRA -> HD ;) 20:58:54 Yeah, we need FRA->HD now, HD->Venue closer to the conf 20:58:55 _rene_ is one step ahead of us 20:58:56 I see more world -> HD 20:59:07 so one could estimate expenses 20:59:28 But yeah, probably not just FRA, if there are other places that make sense on arrival. 20:59:31 cate: FRA, FRA, FRA, FRA, FRA, MUC, STG, MUC, STG, other German airports. 20:59:38 <_rene_> FKB ;) 20:59:47 can they land the 380? 20:59:55 Anyway, we are out of time. 21:00:00 wait 21:00:05 nah, nevermind 21:00:09 the on-site visit 21:00:14 Ok 21:00:17 #topic On-site visit 21:00:18 but I think we can just arrange this 21:00:21 <_rene_> marga: deadline for $world -> HD? 21:00:24 Go ahead 21:00:29 _rene_, Feb 1st 21:00:36 <_rene_> ok 21:00:54 oh just that I am going to talk to them about food selection and bistro as agreed previously 21:01:08 and if people think it might make sense for them to come along, then let me know 21:01:19 we'll be a little restricted on timing 21:01:21 can I throw out an item to think about, bursaries wise? 21:01:27 due to their cooks etc. 21:01:55 #action let madduck know if you want to come along to a site visit mid-Feb 21:02:01 marga: bremner's stage. 21:02:16 madduck, I want! 21:02:17 bremner, something more descriptive for topic? 21:02:25 ;-) 21:02:32 tassia: okay, meet you at 7:46 at Munich train station? ;) 21:02:34 sponsorship for volunteers 21:02:46 #topic Sponsorship for volunteers 21:02:54 madduck: just to make sure: mid-feb, not start of feb? 21:03:05 RichiH: 12 or 15 feb 21:03:07 I would like sponsorship decisions for people whose only reason for applying to made by relevant team leaders 21:03:08 k 21:03:27 bremner: parse error 21:03:28 bremner: sounds reasonable. 21:03:35 Bursaries has no idea who video team wants 21:03:48 ah, ok 21:04:03 so, just piece of a bit of the budget to the teams to pay for volunteer travel, food+accom 21:04:04 bremner, makes sense, how would you envision the process? 21:04:11 bremner: as in, you have no control or insight at all? 21:04:19 this bears the question of how much content team should "suggest" to bursaries on the relevance of submitted events 21:04:22 as long as we don't hand out carte blanche sponsorship for anybody who ticks "volunteer" 21:04:23 or as in you hand team leads a list and they talk to you about it? 21:04:32 I think teams should ask bursaries about volunteers (and speakers???) 21:04:46 I'd say the teams should get a list and choose 21:05:08 I talked with nattie about this, and it least for front desk it made sense 21:05:33 bremner: I think it's very sensible, but for this to work, you need to setup an alarm to ping the team leads at some point I guess 21:05:35 azeem: I think there will be more control if the teams decide. Also we can budget in advance 21:05:38 (and add it to the timeline) 21:05:47 bremner: so, infra team hat on, seven people request sponsorship and you hand tumbleweed and me the list along with a budget. we fit the requests into the budget and talk it over with you? 21:06:36 RichiH: sure, I guess we can coordinate. 21:06:59 bremner: also, just to be clear about procedures, who _decides_? i.e. let's say you and i disagree over sponsorship for X. what's the tie-breaker? 21:07:09 RichiH: you are 21:07:10 * madduck senses overengineering 21:07:15 Ok... "Bursaries coordinates with each team for the sponsorship of their volunteers" ? 21:07:31 madduck: no, avoidance of arguments/misconceptions down the road 21:07:34 bremner, I think the details can be tunned later, but involving teams seems reasonable 21:07:37 marga: I'd say stronger, bursaries delegates decisions to teams 21:07:42 ok. 21:07:54 shall we fine tune on list? 21:08:01 bremner: along with a proposed and hard budget, imo 21:08:02 for those who only have that as a working plan, right? 21:08:18 #agreed Regarding the sponsorship of volunteers, bursaries will delegate decisions to each of the teams (video, front desk, etc) 21:08:19 what if e.g. the video team doesn't constitute fully until DebConf starts and keeps you waiting? 21:08:21 tassia: yes. There a surprising number every year 21:08:37 azeem: then they're screwed and it serves them right 21:08:42 Ok, I think we are done. 21:08:42 fair enough 21:08:49 #endmeeting