15:30:31 #startmeeting 15:30:31 Meeting started Mon Jan 30 15:30:31 2017 UTC. The chair is pollo. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:30:31 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 15:30:37 #topic Roll call 15:30:44 \o 15:30:49 Please say hello if you are here for the meeting! 15:30:52 hello 15:30:53 o/ 15:30:54 o/ 15:30:55 .oO/ 15:31:00 hehe 15:31:00 oh dear, I broke the pattern 15:31:09 in the mean time, please have a look at the agenda: http://deb.li/il9wc 15:31:18 s/o\/\\o/g 15:31:26 grr, missed a slash :) 15:31:38 gwolf: use @s :D 15:31:46 I'm around but won't be following, ping me if you need me 15:31:50 pollo: depends on your language of choice :) 15:31:51 o/ Hello 15:32:33 well I guess we can start then 15:32:45 everyone's fine with the agenda? 15:32:50 yup 15:32:51 . 15:33:00 #topic Content team 15:33:05 OK, so... 15:33:07 still waiting for it to load... 15:33:20 We have done little, but nonzero :) And it seems that (yay!) the tracks will be implementable 15:33:28 I was waiting to know about that to start drafting the CfP 15:33:41 I added talk types to wafer yesterday, took last year's ones 15:33:51 I think I will be working together with the team later today and tomorrow to make sure we have something agreeable 15:34:01 to wafertest 15:34:06 are those the types we want? 15:34:07 yeah, wafertest 15:34:09 also, what about tracks? 15:34:27 ..Haven't checked wafertest (sorry, kids take over my weekends!) but will do so later today. Rest of the content team, please do so as well! 15:34:36 gwolf: https://wafertest.debconf.org/talks/new/ 15:34:39 gwolf, how about invited speakers? 15:34:40 tumbleweed: I understood they are implemented, right? I haven't checked them, but will do it _now_ 15:34:53 gwolf: they're implemented upstream, I haven't cut an upstream release yet 15:34:57 tvaz: right! We have one invited speaker profile to evaluate 15:35:05 I have some more things to throw into the next upstream release... 15:35:06 tumbleweed: oh :( Do you think you will be able to import them? 15:35:13 ah, Deb, cool 15:35:19 oops 15:35:22 gwolf: yeah, in a few days 15:35:28 moin 15:35:28 If you don't, we can implement tracks outside of the workflow 15:35:34 tumbleweed: upper bound? 15:35:42 anyway, I'll try to find the old pad where we added other evaluations 15:35:44 gwolf: sure, I could cut a release right now if we wanted 15:35:47 tumbleweed: Makes sense to hold registration for that? 15:35:48 but I have some things I want to finish :) 15:35:56 well, we aren't ready for regitration, anyway 15:36:05 that's probably a month or two away 15:36:09 tumbleweed: Or FWIW, who adds tracks? If it's an administrative action (I think it should), then no problem - We manage tracks via wiki 15:36:11 gwolf: do you have ideas about tracks? You've talked about them quite a lot but never discussed what tracks you wanted 15:36:20 no, no, I mean CfP registration, sorry! 15:36:29 pollo: we did, although in the Content alias only 15:36:33 we have a short list 15:36:43 yeah, it'll be an admin action 15:36:46 but we will want to add to it later on 15:36:48 we'll want names and short descriptions for each track 15:37:05 tumbleweed: then, OK, I think we can commit to send out the CfP on Wednesday 15:37:24 the 1st? 15:37:24 03Antonio Terceiro 05master dd83098 06debconf-data/br2017.mini 10website/ 10programacao.rst 10programacao.shtml update schedule 15:37:31 yeah, sure, we can do that 15:37:32 yes 15:37:36 wednesday is Feb 1st 15:37:41 so... I think that's it from me 15:37:46 right, but there' sa wednesday next week too :) 15:37:53 tvaz, azeem, ...: Am I missing anything? 15:37:57 #info Cfp will be sent on Feb 1st 15:38:00 tumbleweed: There's always DebConfNext! 15:38:02 gwolf, don't think so :) 15:38:29 oh, content team 15:38:39 we can also define X tracks now, send out the CfP, get proposals and add some more tracks later, as we see we need them 15:38:41 is there a plan for an open day specific cfp ? 15:38:49 h01ger: that's the plan 15:38:54 gwolf: nice 15:38:55 eg. one that could be translated into French 15:38:59 hello (sorry, I'm late) 15:39:04 * h01ger likes the idea of an open day specific cfp 15:39:11 lavamind: We have not discussed it. Good thing to talk about in the team, I like the idea as well 15:39:18 (please #info me as well :) ) 15:39:24 I don't think we have a plan for the open day 15:39:34 lavamind: I think we can use the same submission interface for all talks, and treat the open day as a track 15:39:39 #info gwolf will submit the idea of an OpenDay specific CfP to the rest of the content team 15:39:44 or as a set of tracks, if we have parallel sessions 15:39:49 atm "Open Day" is a talk type 15:39:50 or whatever :) 15:39:56 tvaz: then i think we should make some plans 15:39:59 else… 15:40:00 sure 15:40:03 poor open day 15:40:17 actually we have someone taking care of Oepn Day in the team now 15:40:18 lavamind talked with noel rignon yesterday about taking care of it 15:40:19 pollo: now that you mention I'd scrap it as talk types, it is not in the same sense as the others... 15:40:23 it's RignonNoel 15:40:29 does open day needs someone responsible and driving it? 15:40:31 gwolf: ok 15:40:32 h01ger: we will make plans. 15:40:33 gwolf: I'd also like you to review the talk submission form, so we can see if the field names and discriptions are OK 15:40:47 .oO( we'll make plans great again ) 15:40:55 right. We will go over it with content - In general form, I think it's good as it is. Simple and easy. 15:41:06 * lavamind slaps h01ger around with a large fishbot 15:41:12 Maybe moving the note on "notes" to the head of the field, so it's clearer...? 15:41:16 but nothing pressing 15:41:27 #action Content team will think about an Open Day specific CfP 15:41:42 #info rignonnoel is taking care of the Open Day atm 15:41:47 gwolf: that's a little tricky, so I'll avoid it if I can :P 15:41:53 tumbleweed: When typing a second name in the "Authors" field, nothing appears in dropdown 15:41:58 h01ger, I think we need someone dedicated to that, yes 15:41:59 yeah, that's a privacy thing 15:42:02 I guess that in production it works better? 15:42:07 and noel is a very nice person for that, I think 15:42:16 there was discussion of not exposing other conference attendees to talk submitters 15:42:21 oh... hmmm... "You can set up your coauthors, if you don't mind not knowing who they are" ;-) 15:42:30 #action pollo to update the Team Roles to add noel to open day 15:42:31 I understand :) 15:42:40 pollo: that was done yesterday 15:42:41 We shall review later with you, off-meeting, if you don't mind 15:42:43 the idea was: you set something freeform, the content team will fill it in 15:42:46 goot 15:42:57 thanks for unloading more work on us ;-) Will do. 15:43:08 yeah, we should move on and let you folks deal with that after the meeting 15:43:21 alterntively, I can flip a bit that will let talk submitters see everyone who has an account 15:43:24 pollo: +1 15:43:28 #topic Artwork 15:43:36 * gwolf → pvt with tumbleweed 15:43:38 I had a chat with Renata yesterday 15:43:54 she is the main creator behoind the dc17 logo 15:44:18 we discussed t-shirts, stickers and eventually, banners and posters 15:44:29 hello 15:44:40 she submitted to us design ideas for tshirts, which you can find in ownCloud 15:44:57 #info design ideas for tshirt art are in ownCloud 15:45:08 gwolf: we wanted to check if we could do test runs of the printing 15:45:30 to make sure the colors come out like we want, before placing the order 15:45:32 we should make something clear. Is gwolf taking care of swag or am i? 15:45:44 I don,t really care if you want to do it gwolf 15:46:00 pollo: I guess you are, but I have more contact with the printer :) I'm not taking any responsability off your shoulders! ;-) 15:46:00 but atm it's not clear and I'd like to clarify that :D 15:46:01 oh sorry no I just assumed that since gwolf is in .mx 15:46:08 snap 15:46:10 But I know Gaby, and I think I can answer some bits from her 15:46:29 ...I think we can make some test runs... But some things to consider: 15:46:45 lavamind: for more official questions, please go through me then :P 15:46:50 1. The workshop is AFAICT quite artisanal, so she mixes her inks by hand to get the desired colors/hues 15:47:02 no harm in asking gwolf, but let's try to have 1 official point of contact 15:47:10 She is quite a perfectionist and I've seen her pass the whole evening matching a color ( 15:47:22 (for printing something for a bank with strong design identity issues) 15:47:39 ...But I cannot *assure* that things will be identical between two runs separated by some months 15:47:47 even if you say "ok, that's perfect" or "ok that's shit" 15:47:50 #info https://debconf17-owncloud.univers-libre.net/index.php/s/AGDqjVnx6K7zoNV T-Shirt design proposal 15:48:14 I will be happy to cover the costs of the test runs for her, then be reimbursed or whatever (as she runs on low budget) 15:48:27 hrmm 15:48:30 But... Will you need us to ship the test shirts? Or a photo done by me be enough? 15:48:42 I think your assessment + photos would do 15:48:51 I think some pictures would be fine 15:48:53 but we could wait a bit before, in that case 15:49:05 so that the test run is closer to the production one 15:49:17 lavamind: is there somewhere we should sent our tshirts comments to? 15:49:25 a pad, an email? a list, irc? 15:49:26 lavamind: In any case, I'm waiting for her to contact back. pollo sent a mail some days ago, and she hasn't replied. I SMS-ed her as well yesterday. And in some days, if needed, I'll call her. 15:49:57 pollo: we haven't discussed that, but I can ask if it's ok that I share her email with the team, if you want 15:50:08 gwolf: alright 15:50:10 lavamind: it think a pad might be a better idea 15:50:20 pollo: sure 15:50:30 pad sounds good/best here to me too 15:50:39 it'll be part of the meeting resume 15:50:56 anything else on Artwork? 15:50:59 dedicated tshirt pad seems better, no? 15:51:05 we also discussed doing a promo sticker 15:51:14 h01ger: I meant the pad will be part of it 15:51:23 she submitted two basic designs, one round and one rectangle 15:51:23 like the link to the pad 15:51:30 they are also in ownCloud 15:51:43 pollo: ah :) 15:51:47 but the design is not really final for those 15:51:58 the olympic thingy is final? 15:52:04 if you have ideas, do share 15:52:12 h01ger: hahahaha, it's our logo yeas 15:52:39 #info https://debconf17-owncloud.univers-libre.net/index.php/s/E5ahhMk6B0Pypgb Sticker design proposal 15:52:44 I thought we could put the website URL on the logo, but if you have other ideas, do share also 15:52:51 s/logo/sticker/ 15:53:11 that's it for me 15:53:43 next topic? 15:54:15 ? 15:54:31 #topic Registration 15:54:47 I see you want to open that in 2 weeks 15:54:52 that kind of caught me by suprise :) 15:54:52 we do want that 15:55:02 it's going to be quite a bit of work 15:55:12 we realize :/ 15:55:26 the goal is to close reconfirmations by may 1st 15:55:29 is that crazy? 15:55:38 does registration need to be open for 2 months? 15:55:56 6 weeks in the proposal, feb 15 to april 1 15:56:08 I think you want reconfirmation to be at a point where people can usefully reconfirm 15:56:12 we might have a shorter period for sponsored registration 15:56:15 i.e. they will have their tickets booked 15:56:27 tumbleweed: re-confirmation seems an odd term. Why not "confirmation" 15:56:29 I honestly don't know what is a good amount of time 15:56:34 reconfirmation == confirm you confirmation 15:56:45 conrifmation from who? 15:56:49 pollo: yeah, this is always something that comes up :) 15:56:54 cate, attendees 15:56:55 there isn't really good terminology for it 15:56:55 lavamind: I cannot assure you we will have Content ready by mid-April 15:57:03 which is needed to close reconfirmation by May! 15:57:05 (it comes up alwys because the concept of a reconfirmation is weird) 15:57:16 the point of the reconfirmation is to have a separate step that says "You really are coming right?" 15:57:25 sure, that's a confirmatio 15:57:27 if you just ask people to confirm during registration, they'll say yes, and it doesn't mean much 15:57:30 gwolf: i dont think content needs to be ready for confirmation 15:57:41 it is very short. after registration closes (for sponsored people), we need one month (from experience) to confirm sponsoreed. Only after that people can reconfirm 15:57:50 h01ger: Often, people reconfirm only if their talk is approved or if they love the set of approved talks 15:57:56 pollo: yeah, I'm fine with calling it confirmation 15:58:01 even if our working model is "everything goes in in the end" 15:58:01 \0/ 15:58:09 h01ger, don't we want to have a (pre-)program for people to decide if they want to come or not to the conference? 15:58:13 * gwolf also agrees with having registration-confirmation and do away with reconfirmation 15:58:24 (honest question) 15:58:36 Some years we didn't have reconfirmation, but it is nice to have it near conference, to have less no-showers 15:59:01 h01ger: There are different kinds of audiences to DebConf. Regulars are probably not so much limited by what content we have. Non-regulars want to see the program as full as possible. 15:59:02 yeah, you want the re-(or whatever you call it) confirmation as close to the conference start as possible 15:59:07 except for some speakers i find it very strange that the selected talks matter much… 15:59:08 last from experience with registration at dc16, there were about 50% the numbers of reconfirmees than registered iirc 15:59:09 to be more accurate 15:59:09 But just a mail in later phase, should be enough. Remember to "unattend!" 15:59:13 but not so late tha tit isn't useful 15:59:20 gwolf: agreed 15:59:53 tumbleweed: so, do you think Feb 15th too early ? If yes, please say so 16:00:10 I think it's too early 16:00:10 having clear eta will help us plan 16:00:20 this will just degrade the data quality you get 16:00:31 lavamind: Any reason for the May 1st date specifically? Three months before the conference seems like too much for me (but if i.e. accomodation needs such advance knowledge, I will have to agree) 16:00:46 once talks has been submitted, how much time is needed to select? 16:00:47 most people won't have even booked flights by may 1st 16:00:51 Note: we care much more about sponsored people for registration deadline. The others have more time, and could check the talks 16:01:02 gwolf: for sponsored accomodation, the hotel/residence need the list of names by that date 16:01:11 * h01ger emphasizes what cate just said 16:01:16 I'm keen to implement a rolling confirmation to sponsored attendees 16:01:31 lavamind: is that for both the hotel & McGill? 16:01:32 lavamind: i still think that may 1st date for/from hotels is insane and we should ignore that 16:01:33 tumbleweed: yes to this 16:01:34 i.e. you have X days to accept your bursary, or it'll go to someone else 16:01:35 cate: Oh, important point. Right, for confirmation we need to know who is travel-sponsored. And that is often related to approved (at least, to submitted and sufficiently-rated) talks. 16:01:39 pollo: yes 16:01:40 or give them random names 16:01:47 and change to real names later 16:02:00 :s 16:02:03 reconfirmation makes sense only for things where we have a quota (sponsored food, travel or accommodation) 16:02:04 tell them their request is silly, and move on :) 16:02:05 pseudo random names, maybe, to have less changes later :) 16:02:07 lavamind: have you talked to mcgill about that? 16:02:10 we don't really have a quota for nametags 16:02:15 tumbleweed: that's similarly to what bremner did by "batching" confirmations and re-allocating budget from people that cancelled after they got their bursary approval 16:02:15 h01ger: Can I has a random govt-issued-ID? 16:02:23 so +1 :) 16:02:24 oh wait 16:02:32 DLange: but even with that, we don't spend the entire budget 16:02:37 mcgill requests the rooming list july 5 actually 16:02:44 its the deposit they want may 1st 16:02:45 .oO( Yay! my colliding meeting seems to have been called off! ) 16:02:51 gwolf: no. but if the hotel wants 50 names on may 1st, lets give them 50 names then. and then in july we can change those names to match reality 16:02:57 ok, so what about moving all of lavamind's plans one month further? Does that make more sense? 16:03:06 h01ger: right. Or we change our identities to match those 50 names! 16:03:08 tumbleweed: we never do because people budget their own tavels too high, you know, we did a massive clean up of that last year 16:03:36 pollo: confirmation 2 mnoths before the conference is still rather early 16:03:37 We will have 50 sure names by 1 may. Just not all people will confirm by then IMO 16:03:54 gwolf: :) funny but lets be serious here. having to have attendes confirmed to the hotel on may 1st is an unrealistic goal/requirement, so we need to fix that… 16:03:55 DLange: fwiw, we only ever allocated the lower figures. 16:04:25 so that's not the reason for budget underspend. 16:04:25 pollo: let me rephrase this 16:04:38 what happens if someone wants to register on June 2nd? 16:04:57 they can find their own accommodation? 16:05:01 this ^ 16:05:02 .oO( Oh, meeting not called off. I disappear for now, sorry guys! :( ) 16:05:03 I changed the pad, please look at my proposal 16:05:06 bremner: it reduces the underspend but does not elimiate it (as we do not overcommit the bursary budget by a "experience" margin) 16:05:20 olasd: yeah, I'm fine with that 16:05:21 right. we will fill up cancellation and then people need to search for oen accommodation. 16:05:24 lavamind: does that apply to food too? 16:05:25 ^ this is pretty sad 16:05:31 what cate said 16:05:49 We are not a travel agency, people had much time before 16:05:55 [if we don't delay too much ;-) 16:06:13 I think we want to allow registration up to the last minute (including during the conference) 16:06:14 if we're not a travel agency, then we should stop having people register their accommodation through us 16:06:14 tumbleweed: food is a different beast, the delays can be much much shorter 16:06:22 but there should be a cut of fpoint, where you won't get a printed nametag / shirt 16:06:26 you can't have it both ways 16:06:28 and one were you may not get accomm 16:06:52 but if we've had cancellations, or overestimated, we may have spare accomm 16:06:57 tumbleweed: registration for coming to conference, sure. but for accom there should be a cutoff date 16:07:10 i think clear deadlines is clearer for everyone 16:07:18 us and attendees 16:07:33 yes, but you may actually want late registrants, if you overestimated 16:07:35 I'm sure there'll be lots of room in the onsite accom :p 16:07:38 we certainly had rooms to spare in CPT 16:07:38 we can then deal with individual cases afterewards if there are some 16:07:56 last minute registration might be allocated to indoor rooms 16:08:00 so, when we talk about confirmation, we're only talking about accomm 16:08:16 there's also bursaries 16:08:23 yeah 16:08:38 pollo: I think your timeline can work 16:08:38 food is fine, don't need that delay 16:09:03 we agreed last week not to book people if they are self paying, so as far as accomodation is concerned, it's about sponsored attendees 16:09:13 we should try to describe this on the site 16:09:13 should we go with the timeline I'm proposing? 16:09:36 pollo: someone said bursaries takes ~1 month 16:09:46 pollo: +1 looks reasonable 16:10:05 2 weeks for bursaries? olasd? 16:10:10 there's space there for bursaries to slip 16:10:17 2weeks is too short for bursaries. 16:10:31 I thought 2 weeks would work last year, and I was wrong. 16:10:36 you can run bursaries through July 1st, surely? 16:10:37 bremner: he's talking about people not confirming by july 1st 16:10:55 ok, then never mind me. 16:10:57 I don't understand that timeline 16:11:03 fwiw.... visas alone can take 1 month. 16:11:13 ^ 16:11:16 what does 'close registration' mean? 16:11:32 what does 'bursaries' mean? 16:11:38 close sponsored registration 16:11:55 assign travel/food/accom bursaries 16:12:00 tumbleweed: that's better 16:12:35 and because paid accomm is handled by the hotels, they just stop when they run out? 16:13:10 tumbleweed: yeah, if people want us to book hotel for them 16:13:17 tumbleweed: yes, but we can reserve a minimum number of rooms they can keep, and keep at the rate we agree on 16:13:17 people just move elsewhere 16:13:29 we are not a travek agency <- (c) cate 16:13:32 +1 16:13:59 we said we're sending people directly to the hotels, right? 16:14:08 next topic :p 16:14:09 DLange: it is not my words. These are older than me at DebConf orga 16:14:12 so what's the point of reserving rooms at hotel or at mcgill for other than sponsored then? 16:14:32 tumbleweed: if we don,t "reverse" rooms, there won't be any lefgt 16:14:38 cate: and still they are very true and you remind us regularly. Thank you for that. 16:15:10 pollo: I assume we reserve them, but we aren't involved in the booking 16:15:18 anyway,before moving I still think we should agree on timeline 16:15:21 is the new one ok? 16:15:24 Aug 5 and 6 are sure to keep completely booked in the next few weeks because of a big music festival (osheaga) 16:15:37 pollo: contingent != we pay. We can have a preferential pricing and/or an allocation just to make sure "our" people can still get accomodation 16:15:51 tumbleweed: correct 16:15:57 but that doesn't mean we pay and assume the risk with paying for non-sponsored non-shows 16:16:00 DLange: I think we all agree by now we don,t take payment directly for hotel 16:16:04 the timeline for bursaries *feels* late 16:16:26 olasd: 2 months isn't enough? 16:17:37 may 31st feels late for people to get confirmation that they obtained a bursary, perhaps? 16:17:42 but we want it contingent with content anyway 16:17:53 so it'll be fine like that 16:18:21 #agreed "new" timeline on the pad is the prefered one for registration process for now 16:18:29 #topic catering 16:18:39 tvaz: any news on this? 16:18:40 lavamind: I think we should try to start releasing bursarise long before may 31st 16:18:44 (roll them out in waves) 16:18:52 tumbleweed: ack 16:19:15 pollo, sent a new version of the contract with the recent suggestions, once she agrees we'll be ready to sign 16:19:25 tumbleweed: agreed 16:19:27 the two important things added were 16:20:00 breakfast on the 13 Aug with 24h warn on the amount 16:20:32 and a special menu for the formal dinner, where they may charge a bit more 16:20:58 also added SPI as the entity to sign it 16:21:16 she should answer in the next days, that's all 16:21:28 next topic please 16:21:33 I have to go soon 16:21:39 #topic Accommodation 16:21:41 before we start on this, I think we should stick to the McGill vs Hotel Universel debate for today since the meeting is already pretty long. i'll add other issues for the next meeting 16:21:52 agreed 16:22:15 lavamind: do you wish to explain what the choices are? 16:22:20 I see 96 beds on the agenda 16:22:26 that seems way way low for debconf, doesn't it? 16:22:45 tumbleweed: we'd have 96 beds at the residences 16:22:55 90 onsite 16:23:05 and 40 at the hotel 16:23:09 tumbleweed: we are planning for a lot of people to book accom by themselves 16:23:33 I think we'd still need a number of rooms at the hotel for families and people with mobility issues who can't stay onsite 16:23:39 ok, so the preferential pricing at hotels isn't in this list 16:23:56 tumbleweed: no 16:24:23 tumbleweed: I think a lot of people are going to rent rooms at $random hotels or in airbnb's because our hotel is expensive 16:24:29 a block of rooms can be added on top of that list at the hotel 16:24:55 OK, I derailed. You were going to explain the choices? 16:25:42 * lavamind is struggling to find the wiki page 16:26:05 I put all the info there https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17/Accomodation/Comparison 16:26:11 and it appears gone! 16:26:16 nooo 16:26:29 what the hell 16:26:52 ok anyway 16:27:21 I think for everyone not willing to stay onsite 16:27:22 lavamind: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17/Accommodation/Comparison 16:27:26 accommodation has two m's 16:27:36 https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17/Accommodation/Comparison 16:27:39 aaah 16:27:42 (c'est pas commode je sais) 16:27:46 ok sorry 16:27:53 so yes the info is there 16:28:25 I think it all comes down to this, apart from the cost: close to venue < a real bed 16:28:36 of course we want both 16:29:09 single rooms is also plus 16:29:10 a 16:29:28 but if someone is assigned to the hotel because they dont like sleeping on a cot, our current arrangement doesn't guarantee a real bed as the 3rd person still gets a cot at the hotel (or sleeps with someone else in the same bed) 16:30:07 so, I propose we rent the space that is availabel at the residence and give these people a transit pass 16:30:23 +1 16:30:25 in total it could save us nearly 5k CAD 16:30:35 except for proximity I do not see the advantage of the hotel, the McGill Residences look like the much better choice 16:30:55