20:00:05 <moray> #startmeeting debconf team meeting
20:00:05 <MeetBot> Meeting started Thu Nov 22 20:00:05 2012 UTC.  The chair is moray. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:00:05 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
20:00:11 <moray> hello
20:00:12 <gismo> hello
20:00:14 <heiserhorn> hi
20:00:16 <moray> #topic hello
20:00:18 <rafw> hello
20:00:21 <fil> hi
20:00:26 <darst> hi
20:00:29 <hug> hi
20:00:30 <h01ger> hi
20:00:30 <XTaran> Moin.
20:00:31 <gwolf> hi
20:00:34 <OdyX> hi
20:00:50 <pocock> g'day
20:00:55 <moray> #addchair h01ger
20:00:58 <moray> #addchair gunnar
20:01:03 <gaudroid> hi im gaudenz and mostly unavailable
20:01:05 <moray> hm, wrong command again?
20:01:10 <h01ger> #chairs
20:01:12 <mikam> hi
20:01:12 <h01ger> #chair
20:01:13 <gwolf> moray: my name is gwolf?
20:01:21 <moray> #chairs h01ger gwolf moray
20:01:29 <h01ger> gwolf, your name is gunnar, i seriously believe
20:01:30 <gwolf> #moo
20:01:34 <h01ger> moray, -s
20:01:35 <moray> gwolf: sorry, like I said, just back in, from a work meeting in another city
20:01:38 <moray> #chair h01ger gwolf moray
20:01:38 <MeetBot> Current chairs: gwolf h01ger moray
20:01:40 <moray> wow
20:01:54 <moray> gwolf: and another country even!  (England)
20:01:55 <gwolf> ok, ready to roll?
20:02:12 <OdyX> http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf13/Meetings/20121122 <- Agenda is there.
20:02:22 <OdyX> #info Agenda: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf13/Meetings/20121122
20:02:27 <moray> #topic Le Camp
20:02:41 <moray> So, the local team have requested "a decision" today
20:03:00 <gwolf> Ok... I will say what I just said in my mail: I don't see we can seriously consider anything *but* LeCamp by now
20:03:01 * h01ger is with the local team on this
20:03:16 <moray> Of course, a truly final deal cannot be reached before we have the budget approved, signed etc., but I also agree that getting some more clarity is sensible.
20:03:20 <gwolf> Doing any votes over this is unfair and basically impossible... It has to be done by consensus, of course
20:03:32 <OdyX> there ain't a local team. There are only local team members that-happen-to-be-local :)
20:03:45 <OdyX> (damn, a local too much)
20:03:46 <pocock> gwolf: I agree with your concerns (email) about the social factor - but DebConf itself has a social purpose, and darst's prediction that the event could be `small' or `tiny' suggests a social failing on a bigger scale
20:03:49 <gwolf> And we *do* need to have a decently workable budget (that fits within the contract - about which we will talk about some points later on)
20:04:14 <gwolf> pocock: I don't think a small DebConf (compared our 400+ predictions) would be bad at all
20:04:34 <gwolf> pocock: And I *do* prefer a tiny DebConf to a DebConf that alineates OdyX, gismo, gaudenz, cate, ...
20:04:40 <h01ger> OdyX, i had a different impression at le camp actually. i would go further then just saying there was the beginning of a team, ime there was a team spirit there, definitly on day 2
20:05:04 <moray> OdyX: there is no Local Team, but there is a local team :p
20:05:15 * h01ger doesnt think le camp will be tiny neither. more then 500 people we shouldnt host there, true, but that would be the biggest ever
20:05:18 <OdyX> yeah² you got my point I think :)
20:05:45 <pocock> gwolf: I would not like to speculate on what the wider community wants, but we've seen evidence that sponsors don't like to give large sums of money to a very small event
20:06:19 <gwolf> I *do* think we have to make explicit the shortening option, as has been said by mail
20:06:20 <OdyX> I think we should discuss variants of gaudenz's A-B-C more than hypotheticals.
20:06:25 <gwolf> OdyX: precisely.
20:06:38 <moray> pocock: I suggest that we stick first to discussing the best way for Le Camp, then see if there is consensus for that (as I hope) ornot
20:06:56 <gwolf> OdyX: *and* the correspondence with those options with the contract. Which, yes, is based upon good faith, but should not bind us to the impossible.
20:07:05 <OdyX> to that point, I think B is probably the one that suits the team best, but is also quite risky. We push Mr P quite far in his boundaries IMHO.
20:07:24 <pocock> moray: I have regularly suggested ways to `help' Le Camp, e.g. deferring the signature until we get Canton Neuchatel to provide support
20:07:29 <OdyX> h01ger: can you give us a status update on the contract; you had a phone call with Mr.P, right ?
20:07:44 * XTaran agrees with OdyX. We should kill the trust h01ger built.
20:07:57 <XTaran> +not
20:08:00 <XTaran> :)
20:08:03 <h01ger> gwolf, i disagree with having/even desiring a shortening option. i think its way more money to desire (=work on! (mind you!)) more sponsorship money now - and then in 6 month, sure, discuss shorten if we have to. but til then, no. get more money, make it happen!
20:08:07 * gwolf stops scratching head at XTaran ;-)
20:08:10 <XTaran> Meh. Ambiggous.
20:08:17 * XTaran agrees with OdyX. We should not kill the trust h01ger built.
20:08:28 * gismo does not agree on any shortnening
20:08:40 <hug> and it gives us the option to rent some houses later for debconf without needing to rent the full place.
20:08:51 <h01ger> now i definitly disagree with shortening. in 4-6 months, lets discuss it, if needed
20:08:58 * pocock thinks 35k for 20-30 people at DebCamp is a lot
20:09:06 <h01ger> but shall we change agenda topic now?
20:09:15 <gwolf> h01ger: shortening and then re-extending might end up in something not-as-perfect... Maybe in something more expensive. But we need to consider it
20:09:22 <h01ger> #topic le camp, contract status
20:09:37 <gwolf> h01ger: The problem is that we have to leave open to LeCamp to schedule $otherstuff during week 1
20:09:40 <h01ger> gwolf, yes, but thats nothing for a contract, but a plan to keep in mind
20:09:45 <gwolf> even if just in part of their installations
20:09:49 <h01ger> anyway, let me tell you about my phonecall...
20:10:18 <h01ger> i could start with that le camp is not really opening to a shortening option, that would be a direct reply, but a wrong start
20:10:28 <gwolf> h01ger: We have good trust with Mr. Pianaro. Yes, please come in witht he phonecall thing. But that does not mean we can commit to the full proposal and then back off it... the contract should at least acknowledge the possibility!
20:10:39 <h01ger> also i really disagree with shortening, not because le camp, but because debcnf
20:10:55 <h01ger> let me explain
20:12:02 <h01ger> so the phone call was good and nice, but mr pianora really dislikes us addening a shortening option, or any change _proposals_. i do think, that we could change some things, sign that and send to him, asking him to accept this. but these should be fair changes, no game changers
20:12:04 <h01ger> but
20:12:11 <h01ger> as i read the contract
20:12:26 <h01ger> it doesnt bind us to anything really, except that they expect 160k
20:12:43 <h01ger> but, it doesnt say what happens, if we only reach 150k
20:12:54 <h01ger> and
20:13:01 <h01ger> it says that we pay what we use
20:13:20 <h01ger> and, that we tell them what we have used, after debconf13, and then they will make a bill based on this
20:13:27 <h01ger> so there is a lot of trust between us
20:13:38 <h01ger> so
20:13:55 <h01ger> sending them an "unfriendly but signed contract" might be not the wisest thing
20:14:22 <h01ger> and as said, as there is no real hard data on it, except pay for what we use, and that we shall reach 160k
20:14:30 <gwolf> h01ger: The contract *does* bind us to the 160k, right? How come you say "it does not say what happens if we only reach 150k"?
20:14:35 <h01ger> i dont think we explicitly need to add "soft options"
20:14:44 <gwolf> Even with fullest trust, we don't want to breach it
20:14:45 <h01ger> as they are inexplicitly in there.
20:14:52 <hug> a shortening option is not the same as declaring from the beginning he can use his 1st week for other clients.
20:14:55 <h01ger> gwolf, because
20:15:06 <h01ger> we will work very hard
20:15:17 <h01ger> having to reach 160k, will motivate us, to reach this goal
20:15:23 <darst> contract actually says 150-160k in it?
20:15:46 <OdyX> .oO(I think I slightly changed my mind wrt DebCamp and started to agree with pocock: co-hosting another event during DebCamp to rise the attendance up could be a good idea. _BUT_LATER_ON )
20:15:48 <heiserhorn> darst: no
20:15:49 <h01ger> which i totally think is realistic. given so fars work, given options/ideas/plans discussed, given sponsors in the pipe, given the need
20:15:58 <heiserhorn> only for cancellation fees
20:16:11 <gwolf> hug: DebCamp does not require the amount of space DebConf requires. I think we would all breathe more easily if he could rent some of his buildings during week 1
20:16:11 <h01ger> darst, what heiserhorn says
20:17:01 <OdyX> gwolf: my point being we can sub-rent to another floss org, later on, if we need so.
20:17:10 <gwolf> h01ger: we could sublet some of the buildings to another event, following OdyX... but that involves extra logistics (we cannot defer until an indeterminate laterness)
20:17:17 <gwolf> OdyX: right. What is "later on"?
20:17:18 <hug> gwolf: yes, just renting 2-3 buildings would probably be enough
20:17:18 <darst> if we can't reduce people to reduce costs below that I am anti signing until I know more
20:17:19 <h01ger> now, several people are demotivated, having a high goal does motivate!
20:17:23 <moray> that sounds even worse than our normal travel agent attempt
20:17:34 <h01ger> gwolf, yes, those are good panic plans for april
20:17:43 <OdyX> ^ ack
20:17:43 <h01ger> for today i would say, we plan debconf with >400 people
20:17:52 <gwolf> h01ger: I don't know... having too high a goal can also be demotivating
20:17:59 <h01ger> (325 in le camp in house, 50 in tents, >50 in cities)
20:18:10 <moray> having a risk of big problems is certainly very demotivating for me
20:18:25 <gwolf> (personally, I don't expect, nor look forward to, such a big DebConf)
20:18:26 <h01ger> gwolf, the current budget even includes 15k travel sponsorship. we have come a long way, this goal is not so high anymore at all.
20:18:53 <gwolf> h01ger: right. And I'm willing to lose that travel sponsorship if *really* needed. However, we must be sure we can pay our base costs.
20:19:20 <h01ger> moray, exactly this is why i wont to settle on something now. the longer we dont decide (+sign), the bigger the risks get. (and the amount of money to achieve the same)
20:20:01 <h01ger> gwolf, i do want to have travel sponsorship. and i entirely see this happening.
20:20:22 <gwolf> h01ger: but I cannot stop listening to darst - who so far has always been right (   :)   )
20:20:50 <h01ger> gwolf, his 100k sponsorship estimation is very very very conservative.
20:21:05 <gwolf> h01ger: but the 60 professional is not
20:21:06 <h01ger> gwolf, but lets not meta talk
20:21:25 <pocock> h01ger: and RMLL only reached 95k CHF
20:21:29 * gwolf meta-shutsup
20:21:57 <h01ger> gwolf, there are a lot of europeans who want to come and who we can make pay. (by closing sponsored accom+food when we are out of money, thus increasing this...)
20:22:22 * gwolf wants others to speak up on their perception of this
20:22:26 <gwolf> I am stillnot bought
20:22:27 <h01ger> its finally debconf in the center of europe
20:22:50 <pocock> various people in Europe have also said they would not come
20:23:04 <pocock> based on the lack of accommodation choices
20:23:27 <h01ger> (and buying food+accom from us/le camp is the cheapest they'll find in .ch - except sleeping in the car / woods and eating cold food / camping cooking all day)
20:23:36 <h01ger> one of the cheapest...
20:24:00 <pocock> actually, Interlaken was slightly cheaper in some scenarios
20:24:09 <hug> I think we should go for the 1 week debconf option and then if we have enough money add some houses for 1st week which are still free. saves us a lot of money
20:24:23 <gwolf> pocock: please. I think there is consensus to ask you to drop Interlaken out of the optinos.
20:24:36 <heiserhorn> gwolf: +1
20:24:42 <XTaran> h01ger: Or the undergrounds. ;-)
20:24:49 <moray> gwolf, pocock: or rather, interlaken is a good option ... if we really fail to make le camp work we can consider it
20:24:54 <h01ger> XTaran, right!
20:25:03 <pocock> I'm not asking for a vote on Interlaken (and I never have)
20:25:15 <OdyX> as much as I dislike it because of its inherent risks of losing the deal altogether, I think B represents the team consensus, unfortunately.
20:25:16 <hug> if lecamp is cancelled we should look at ALL options
20:25:24 <pocock> it is just a useful tool for comparison and for measuring whether we are getting the best deal from Le Camp
20:25:31 <hug> not just go with the secondary venue
20:25:42 <h01ger> moray, its not a good option. its a last ressort to make something happen in .ch in 2013
20:25:58 <darst> I don't want to go on trust when writing says otherwise, and don't want to assume unlimited money
20:26:00 * pocock has another option too
20:26:03 <gismo> OdyX: which consensus?  Again, I am against any shortening
20:26:04 <fil> it strikes me that the fact that we've got to a point where funding even a shortened DC seems realistic, at this time of year, makes it almost inevitable that we'll fund the full thing -- in which case it would be a shame to waste money and goodwill on shortening options that we most likely won't need/want
20:26:07 <gwolf> h01ger: which makes it a good option - for the last-case scenario :)
20:26:10 <OdyX> going for B means trying to push LeCamp very far; if we lose it we're basically 6 months in advance, with no motivation, some cash and no venue.
20:26:14 <h01ger> OdyX, i disagree. several people dont think shortening is right
20:26:19 <gwolf> but for now, interlaken is more something that irritates than something that helps
20:26:24 <gwolf> if just on the social basis.
20:26:37 <h01ger> OdyX, also what fil said
20:27:10 <OdyX> h01ger: yeah. at least I see ana and moray (if I'm not mistaken) very much far from picking A.
20:27:25 <gwolf> OdyX: we can ask Mr. Pianaro to shorten. And if he absolutely disagrees, we can *still* try to book the two full weeks
20:27:36 <gwolf> that could be seen as a course of action even! :)
20:27:39 <h01ger> gwolf, yes, sure we can and ask again
20:27:40 <h01ger> fine
20:27:51 <gwolf> fil: I want to agree with you...
20:27:52 <hug> but this is not the same as b)
20:27:53 <h01ger> but i also want this meeting to decide to sign if he doesnt want to shorten
20:27:58 <moray> gwolf: but for them to agree it will have to seem like the only thing we can agree to, I guess
20:28:00 <OdyX> gwolf: I think A is the safest because we have a trust with him. Going B means either havig an angry Mr.P. or no LeCamp.
20:28:09 * h01ger repeats: but i also want this meeting to decide to sign if he doesnt want to shorten
20:28:29 <h01ger> else we are just... dumb. imnsho.
20:28:32 <moray> that negates the consensus hope
20:28:45 <h01ger> we can still go B in 4 month
20:28:49 <h01ger> then we pay some fine
20:29:01 <h01ger> (spelling like this?)
20:29:07 <h01ger> ("fine")
20:29:18 <pocock> h01ger: not unless the option to pay a `fine' is in the contract
20:29:19 <fil> penalty
20:29:22 <OdyX> I think going A-and-eventually-B-later while being clear, straight and honest with Mr.P is the fairest and safest bet.
20:29:23 <h01ger> heh
20:29:24 <hug> the only way you can convince lecamp is, that there is no other plan with 2 weeks.
20:29:29 <gwolf> ...I do see LeCamp as our only option (modulo acts-of-god or similar catastrophes) - So, yes, I would first try to persuade him to shorten, and if opposition is absolute, then agree to sign as it is
20:29:44 <hug> OdyX: agree
20:29:45 <OdyX> gwolf: for trust it's better to do the reverse
20:29:48 <gwolf> h01ger: but if he does not want to consider us shortening... well, four months from now he won't be very happy either
20:30:26 <OdyX> gwolf: MrP's has no interest in putting us in the hole.
20:30:32 <gwolf> OdyX: If we later say "ok, we will sign two weeks", he will know we are  really in problems getting to the money level - which I think is right
20:30:39 <hug> sorry misunderstood you. thought you said b and maybe a
20:30:42 <gismo> h01ger: in 4 months IIRC he will get 60k already, so maybe he will be more willing?
20:31:03 * h01ger needed a 2min break, catching up
20:31:04 <gismo> gwolf: ^^
20:31:13 <gismo> gwolf: what I wrote
20:31:29 <gwolf> gismo: yes. But that's still quite speculative.
20:31:40 <gwolf> I *hope* in 4 months we won't have to worry about the point
20:31:41 <h01ger> gismo, in 4 months he will get 20k
20:31:45 <h01ger> 30
20:32:00 <gismo> h01ger: thank you
20:32:03 <h01ger> and 30 more in >6
20:32:10 <gwolf> but epxlicitly adding the possibility to shorten as a (valid, legal) option of the contract... or to share the space with other people, would be better
20:32:17 <h01ger> (+we have that already)
20:32:28 <h01ger> gwolf, we surely can squeeze in other people if we need to
20:32:30 <gwolf> h01ger: we para-have it.
20:32:39 <h01ger> there is no need to write this down
20:32:42 <moray> gwolf: the per-day fee means we don't
20:32:43 <gwolf> h01ger: we would have to care to squeeze them in (and sublet the venue)
20:32:44 <h01ger> and document our insecurity
20:33:27 <h01ger> shall we move on with the agenda? i think every think is said...
20:33:32 <hug> gwolf: i don't think you can convince lecamp to add a shortening option. just tell them we want one week for now. and if we have enough money we will ask again. but he should be free to rent the houses the 1st week.
20:33:55 <gwolf> hug: right, that's what I expect to happen
20:34:20 <pocock> that is my understanding of option (B) - we are definitively making a 1 week booking only
20:34:24 <gwolf> hug: Maybe we can rent two buildings during week 1
20:34:39 <OdyX> that's not my understanding of MrP's intentions. Again, I think going B has a quite high risk of MrP saying "okay, then no"
20:34:52 <rafw> OdyX: +1
20:34:55 <hug> the request needs to be fair for us and him. he cannot just hold the whole venue for the case we might still want it.
20:35:00 * h01ger like to emphasize what he already said: we should have more confidence in ourselves. this is the best prepared debconf (9 month in advance) ever. the best sponsorship team so far too! (it will also be the most expensive debconf probably, so we need to keep on rocking!)
20:35:04 <heiserhorn> OdyX: +1
20:36:19 <hug> OdyX: there is a risk involved. but we only have X money and if we spend it in one week is even better for him.
20:36:20 <h01ger> i also agree with OdyX, surely we can say this, (for the Xth time), but if we press hard.. we risk. (_for nothing, really!_)
20:36:39 * gwolf +1s hug
20:37:14 <OdyX> I'd propose to be fair with MrP and tell him "look, we book the two weeks, but it will be hard, it might be that we'll use only part of the buildings, maybe you could lend them to others, just talk to us"
20:37:32 <h01ger> being fair is the way to go, definitly
20:37:37 <OdyX> and stay in a fair, direct and honest relation with him.
20:37:38 <moray> OdyX: that doesn't reduce the budget
20:37:52 <h01ger> moray, it makes us get along
20:38:00 <gwolf> being fair means not overcommitting
20:38:03 <OdyX> moray: it does if MrP can lend other houses to others...
20:38:04 <hug> yes, we need to be fair. and telling him he can take booking is fair to him.
20:38:05 <XTaran> #save
20:38:08 <gwolf> and not overcommitting means keeping trust levels.
20:38:09 <h01ger> #save
20:38:10 <gwolf> #save
20:38:12 <OdyX> #save
20:38:19 <gwolf> God Save Us.
20:38:21 <h01ger> Y_Plentyn, you are save now
20:38:38 <XTaran> Y_Plentyn: Meeting logs up until now should be in the web
20:38:39 <h01ger> (meetbot.debian.net has the logs we just saved)
20:38:42 <Y_Plentyn> ic
20:38:46 <fil> moray: it would reduce the budget if they agreed to offset the costs against what they get by letting to others, which would be reasonable in that case
20:38:49 <Y_Plentyn> i hate time zones
20:39:03 * gwolf hates the space-time continuum
20:39:26 * h01ger likes "we can do it"
20:39:32 <h01ger> cause we can
20:39:33 <hug> OdyX: we should be open to him, that the number of attendees depends on the sponsorship money we get.
20:39:36 <gwolf> There is no reason to book the full thing for the first week
20:39:41 <gwolf> cause we don't need it
20:39:44 <moray> fil: we have fixed per day costs currently, so there would need to be some strange profit-share from other income (that they have no incentive to generate)
20:39:48 <h01ger> gwolf, we have been
20:40:04 <h01ger> gwolf, we are at the stage where everything has been said and he wants us to sign like this
20:40:37 <pocock> if we propose a 1 week booking and Le Camp rejects it outright, I'm happy to continue looking for other venues (not just Interlaken)
20:40:40 <h01ger> and i say the contract is fine for us as it is, as it says: we pay what we use. and we need to pay penalty if we cancel completly
20:40:42 <gwolf> h01ger: we are at a stage that some of us, including those that have made the budget and inspired us enough confidence to say "go for LeCamp" (hug, darst) are not ready to sign the contract as it is...
20:41:17 <gwolf> I don't feel it prudent just to be optimistic for the sake of it
20:41:30 <h01ger> gwolf, these people are great, but they are also careful bean counters. thats why we love them! but...
20:41:33 <gwolf> nor do I think we should aim at an oversized DebConf just because it's in central Europe.
20:41:58 <hug> I think we don't need the full venue for debcamp anyway. it will just cost us an extra 35k.
20:42:01 <h01ger> i'm not optimistic, but realistic. i dare to say...
20:42:02 <gwolf> and we cannot base our hopes on it attracting so many paying attendees
20:42:02 <fil> frankly, I'm surprised that we're at a point that signing even for a week seems sane this far in advance -- I agree with h01ger that limiting our ambition would be a shame  (particularly if we then find that the first week has been rented out, and we cannot have it)
20:42:17 <moray> h01ger: I'm afraid I also think we have a responsibility to be careful
20:42:29 <h01ger> moray, we are
20:42:36 <h01ger> sigh
20:42:37 <h01ger> very
20:42:46 <h01ger> and very hard working too
20:42:47 <hug> fil: we could rent like one house which is a lot cheaper than the ful venue
20:42:54 <h01ger> and we know about the problems and what to do
20:42:56 <gwolf> fil: I don't think having 300 people sleeping there and using all those buildings makes sense to be called DebCamp, as it would be a completely different animal
20:42:57 <h01ger> and we have time
20:43:10 <gwolf> ...and all the estimations have been made with semi-usual patterns
20:43:44 <h01ger> #topic contract signature: who, how, when
20:43:46 <gwolf> hug: and renting that "one house" means AIUI renting "one house" inside LeCamp, not going to elsewhere.
20:44:09 <gwolf> #info Not signing the contract as it is, at least until everybody is convince.
20:44:20 <h01ger> (+if, if you really still want to discuss this further. i'd really like to close in 16min, but hah)
20:44:21 <gismo> gwolf: renting single houses does not mean that we will have the same facilities as the whole
20:44:23 <gwolf> s/everybody/enough of a consensus/
20:44:26 <OdyX> h01ger: wait, do we have a decision ? I'd rather discuss 10 minutes more and have a better #info.
20:44:27 <gwolf> gismo: agree
20:44:40 <gwolf> OdyX: agree
20:44:56 <gwolf> gismo: some conditions will not be as good to us if we only rent partially, I can live with that
20:45:02 <h01ger> this has been again so much "zerredet" - talked into oblivion.
20:45:05 <gwolf> but prefer not to rent the whole thing we don't need
20:45:18 <gwolf> ...And I do prefer not having an oversized DebCamp which is not a DebCamp
20:45:24 <darst> fil, not enough money to do only one week, that is also assuming the "more" happens too and still requires continued fundraising
20:45:38 <OdyX> "not signing the contract" (before end of november) brings us to square zero - no DebConf13.ch at all or restart non-lecamp venues evaluations.
20:45:53 <gwolf> Right, we have to sign *a* contract
20:46:08 * h01ger nods OdyX
20:46:33 <OdyX> can we agree on a variation between A and B ?
20:46:42 <moray> OdyX: what do you propose for that?
20:46:49 <Y_Plentyn> I see here 2 quite fixed positions. Is there any common ground between these?
20:46:59 <FBI> debconf-data: 3 joerg committed revision 3887 to debconf-data: fix scripts, also make ttree NON verbose
20:46:59 <FBI> debconf-data: files changed: U   dc11/website/ttreerc
20:46:59 <XTaran> OdyX: Like "C is out of reach"?
20:47:00 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc12/bin/update-website
20:47:02 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc12/website/ttreerc
20:47:04 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc13/bin/update-website
20:47:06 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc13/website/ttreerc
20:47:15 <OdyX> moray: don't know, but I think we need to find something agreeable between these both.
20:47:20 <gwolf> XTaran: Yes, I think "C is out of reach".
20:47:23 <fil> darst: we never have anything like the money needed at this time (or even promises of it) which is why travel sponsorship is always such a pain
20:47:33 <gwolf> And it should be taken out of calculations to reduce that part of induced noise.
20:47:43 <OdyX> moray: I've stated what I feel are the risks of B, I'm clearly for A but could agree to something clearer that stays a honest deal for MrP
20:47:50 <moray> fil: darst knows the debconf money flows better than anyone else
20:48:01 <h01ger> moray, he is too careful this time
20:48:24 <gwolf> h01ger: there is no point in just burning money by renting the full thing.
20:48:45 <hug> we need to agree on something. i'd prefer to give authorisation to sign with lecamp under certain conditions.
20:48:49 <h01ger> gwolf, you dont get it. (the contract thing. signing doesnt mean what you just said)
20:48:52 * h01ger takes a break
20:48:58 <h01ger> 5min or so
20:49:21 <OdyX> okay let's keep on discussing without h01ger I think :)
20:49:28 <OdyX> moray: what's your take ?
20:49:41 <moray> OdyX: as I see it, could get consensus today if there is some reduced-budget version
20:49:51 <moray> which could mean full shortening, or not renting the whole place the first week
20:50:09 <hug> otherwise we'd be at the same point as before the meeting.
20:50:12 <moray> if people are only happy with "whole thing, whole two weeks", we will not get any consensus today
20:50:23 <gwolf> right, I think partial-renting would be a consensus between A and B
20:50:44 <moray> and I don't think we have any valid mechanism to force a vote today, and if we did force a vote we would probably just lose people from *whichever* option lost
20:51:08 <fil> moray: I know that -- we also know that we're not very good at deciding to spend money we don't yet have, despite the fact that that failing hurts us every year
20:51:11 <gwolf> I think we all agree the contract must be signed in the promised time. And that the contract is not too far from the ideal state.
20:51:18 <OdyX> moray: I agree. I'm not sure we can get consensus either. I think the last word is in the DebConf chairs.
20:51:21 <h01ger> you are discussing things which are fine and dandy, but mostly show that you have not been involved in this contract thing.
20:51:35 * h01ger sighs
20:52:14 <gwolf> h01ger: we have not been involved, right, but a contract is a contract. With all the goodwill in the world.
20:52:21 <fil> moray: that was a slow response to you previous comment to me BTW
20:52:42 <h01ger> gwolf, yes. and i say, lets sign it. its what we want
20:52:57 <h01ger> (for reasoning, please read backlog)
20:52:58 <darst> I am going now and if I can't say more hug/moray/gwolf each get 1/3 of my vote/choice
20:53:32 * h01ger is tempted to leave as well, i have said everything i can say.
20:53:40 <gwolf> Historically we have never needed (and mostly never got) the whole venue for the first week (except for the video guys cabling and stuff)
20:54:01 <h01ger> gwolf, historically we never discussed contract negotiations at this detail
20:54:14 <gwolf> And I don't expect it to be different. There is no need to rent the full venue if we can rent a part of it.
20:54:41 <Y_Plentyn> hm. what about the 2 sides give a position statement?
20:54:59 <gwolf> Y_Plentyn: I think we already did... several times :-/
20:55:13 <OdyX> yes. I propose the following course of action then:
20:55:14 <Y_Plentyn> for the logs, and we make clear which sides we are on?
20:55:23 <gwolf> #save
20:55:53 <Y_Plentyn> gwolf: this is what I also see
20:56:00 <h01ger> 15min break?
20:56:13 <h01ger> we are at 1h now...
20:56:15 <Y_Plentyn> 2 sides with opposing views of the course of action
20:56:16 <gwolf> Y_Plentyn: ok - We are between options A (full 2weeks, sign contract as it is) and B (full shortening to one week or a little bit more than that). And we have developed a partial renting as a compromise position
20:56:34 <Y_Plentyn> gwolf: please give only your side
20:56:35 <gwolf> h01ger: I prefer not to take a break... I want to go to lunch at some point of the evening
20:56:58 <h01ger> gwolf, and i had a 9h work day already
20:56:58 <OdyX> #info we mostly agree that 1 partial-week + 1 full week is our ideal world's solution.
20:57:17 <h01ger> anyway
20:57:18 <gwolf> OdyX: thanks a lot for that agreeing...
20:57:51 <OdyX> proposal: we go with full-two-weeks but use the trust we have with MrP to discuss the way to address this partial first week.
20:58:10 <OdyX> that means letting him lent buildings, etc during the first week.
20:58:17 <pocock> but we need to be clear: does this mean that there is no authority to sign a contract for 100% use of the site in the first week?
20:58:29 <hug> OdyX: mr. p needs to know if he can rent the first week to other clients
20:58:31 <OdyX> We wouldn't change the contract (to be discussed in details) but _discuss_ with MrP.
20:58:46 <h01ger> OdyX, and then, if/when he says "no"
20:58:51 <h01ger> this is silly
20:59:01 <h01ger> this meeting should decide to sign
20:59:02 <h01ger> or nit
20:59:03 <h01ger> not
20:59:06 * gismo agrees with h01ger
20:59:47 <heiserhorn> h01ger: +1
20:59:52 <h01ger> of course, sure, first present plan B... but then, still sign plan A... and if we fail fail fail the next month
20:59:53 * XTaran agrees with OdyX and hug.
20:59:54 <OdyX> h01ger: I think we should put it in the way that we offer him some flexibility, as we don't need the full venue.
20:59:57 <h01ger> we can make another plan
20:59:58 <fil> BTW do we have any indication how much might be saved by the partial rent option?
20:59:59 <gwolf> h01ger: no. The meeting also involves making the precisions, and at the very least, putting some notes in the contract asking for such flexibility
21:00:24 <OdyX> h01ger: no, it's full-A + discussion to make first-week clear, potentially out-of-contract
21:00:25 <h01ger> gwolf, dream on - sorry to be brief
21:01:00 <hug> OdyX: I'd prefer the other way, we sign the debconf week and he can happily rent the first week.
21:01:02 <XTaran> OdyX++
21:01:09 * h01ger notes its an hour now. and that gismo and heiserhorn have also already discussed with mr p
21:01:12 <XTaran> hug: Isn't that the same?
21:01:19 <h01ger> we cannot back up all the time
21:01:30 <OdyX> #save
21:01:31 <h01ger> and also dont have to. we are doing great
21:01:46 <gwolf> #sigh
21:01:54 <h01ger> #rinserepeat
21:02:05 <hug> no, I'd prefer to keep the first week out of the contract
21:02:06 <pocock> we need to tell him what this group has agreed to.  If he refuses, we look elsewhere.  Otherwise we will go in circles all night.
21:02:17 <hug> which would make it possible to decide now.
21:02:30 <h01ger> so, who is for postponing?
21:02:43 <gwolf> what do we gain by postponing?
21:02:47 <gwolf> what does postponing mean?
21:02:52 <OdyX> nothing afaimc
21:02:55 <h01ger> gwolf, not signing now
21:02:56 <gwolf> how long, gaining precisely what?
21:03:17 <gwolf> h01ger: I am for being rational and not renting the full venue for the two weeks *EVEN*IF*WE*CAN*
21:03:41 <gwolf> DebCamp does not mean "just invite everybody in Central Europe to come".
21:04:00 <h01ger> gwolf, i feel sorry for you that you read the current contract that way, even after several times explaining that this is wrong. and i dont read the contract like this and i do recommend to sign
21:04:04 <h01ger> #sigh
21:04:12 <hug> gwolf: agree and it would only for debcamp. debconf would still be packed
21:04:38 <OdyX> I think MrP will say no to one-week only. and it's not a situation I want to be in in one week.
21:05:00 <gaudroid> odyx ++
21:05:07 <XTaran> OdyX++
21:05:08 <hug> OdyX are you sure if it means we'd cancel?
21:05:51 <heiserhorn> hug: I think he will prefere to find other people for the 2 whole weeks rather than continuing with us
21:05:54 <hug> we're spending the same amount of money anyway
21:05:57 <OdyX> hug: I think it puts us in the bad-guys box, where we are way better in the good-guys-that-try-hard box.
21:07:04 <pocock> let's say we had 250k CHF in the bank now: would we pay for a DebCamp?  Would we pay more travel sponsorship, or something else?
21:07:05 <hug> that's why probably i, ze evil german speaking treasurer would need to talk with him.
21:07:12 <pocock> would we give some back to Debian to buy servers?
21:07:36 <OdyX> pocock: STOP hypotheticals now, it doesn't help, _at_all_ !
21:07:57 <gwolf> Something that's clear to me is that... well, if (almost) all of the locals don't want the contract to be changed, it will not be changed. As the people doing the negotiations would not do them
21:08:20 <FBI> debconf-data: 3 joerg committed revision 3888 to debconf-data: oh what use are rc files if you then override em at the cmdline? drop -v
21:08:20 <FBI> debconf-data: files changed: U   dc12/bin/update-website
21:08:23 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc13/bin/update-website
21:08:30 <gwolf> But I cannot stop paying attention to all of the analysis done up to now by the people that do know the monies
21:08:37 <pocock> gwolf: hug is the last one to meet with Mr Pianaro
21:08:40 <h01ger> gwolf, thats not coming across very clear here
21:08:48 <gismo> gwolf: I think you should trust a bit more our committment?
21:09:35 <gwolf> gismo: I really trust your commitment.
21:09:38 <gismo> gwolf: IOW, I think if we decide something to be changed, the negotiatiors [if this is the right term] will do it
21:09:46 <hug> gismo: it's not about commitment, but is debcamp worth 40k?
21:09:59 <gismo> hug: IMHO yes
21:10:02 <OdyX> I think it can be yes.
21:10:03 <h01ger> hug, i dont think thats the question now. and imo yes.
21:10:09 <hug> ok
21:11:25 <gwolf> putting it a bit differently
21:11:55 <hug> mr. pianaro did only seem to care about the total amount of money and not if it's 1 or 2 weeks.
21:11:56 <gwolf> given the work pattern we have always had on DebCamp... Does it make sense to rent auditoriums, Big Rooms, and lodging for 325 people?
21:12:23 <h01ger> gwolf, what i said at 21:04 UTC
21:13:06 <gismo> gwolf: we are renting the full space at a very good price, which is IMHO better than renting less for how much (I really do not know)?
21:13:23 <h01ger> yes, the sum of pieces is as high or higher
21:13:35 <h01ger> thats the default contract the have
21:13:51 <gwolf> right, we don't know, as the option has not been tried
21:14:12 <Y_Plentyn> there is no time to try options as far as I can see
21:14:14 <gwolf> Could it be tried? By making a friendly phone call with our trusting friend?
21:14:27 <gismo> gwolf: the option is in the public PDF from LeCamp, but it depends how many people we are expecting
21:14:38 <h01ger> gwolf, its late evening here. and we shall decide today. so no.
21:14:55 <gismo> gwolf: IOW, we know the single prices for each building (e.g. the one for the last BSP was 650.00 for up to 20 beds IIRC)
21:15:02 <gwolf> h01ger: "deciding today" basically means "this way or nothing"...
21:15:05 <h01ger> (not with a phone call. the options is in svn, but its not really better)
21:15:18 <h01ger> gwolf, no(nonono)
21:15:37 <gwolf> I think we *have* advanced quite a bit since 90 minutes ago.
21:15:42 * h01ger goes back in scrollback to find where he already explained
21:15:54 <gismo> <http://www.lecamp.ch/hebergementPrestation.php?lang=en>
21:16:01 <OdyX> an important emphasis is what we can achieve with MrP on our side (good-guys) instead of against us (bad guys). With him on our side everything (will be okay) will be easier than putting him against.
21:16:17 <h01ger> 20:14 + 20:15 UTC
21:16:22 <XTaran> OdyX++
21:16:29 <h01ger> OdyX++
21:16:44 <heiserhorn> OdyX: +1
21:16:59 <OdyX> like formal dinner, lunches for daytrip, arranging C&W, etc, etc etc. All that will be at a snap of fingers with him on our side.
21:17:14 <gwolf> OdyX: do you thing working with him how to be responsible money-wise with what we offer to him means us being "bad guys" who don't want to pay?
21:17:24 <pocock> if we commit to something silly now and can't pay later, we are just deferring the moment when we become the bad guys
21:17:34 <h01ger> this is 21:05 UTC, btw ;p
21:17:41 <gismo> gwolf: after 9 months of negotiations on the back, yes
21:17:44 <XTaran> pocock: Which wouldn't be that bad, would it?
21:17:56 <OdyX> gwolf: what gismo says.
21:17:57 <h01ger> we are going in circles
21:18:04 <pocock> xtaran: if people show up and he doesn't let them in, it will be bad
21:18:19 <XTaran> pocock: Ok, not that late.
21:18:36 <OdyX> pocock: I think if we consider that as a higher probability than "making it", we should stop now.
21:18:42 <OdyX> "risks management"
21:19:09 * h01ger points at topic
21:19:11 <gwolf> anyway - I cannot just repeat stuff forever. But I cannot say ignoring what darst+hug have recommended so far is responsible.
21:19:12 <FBI> debconf-data: 3 joerg committed revision 3889 to debconf-data: commit whats actually in use
21:19:12 <FBI> debconf-data: files changed: U   dc9/bin/update-website
21:19:25 <h01ger> gwolf, no one is ignoring it
21:19:27 * gwolf points at his USB thumbdrive.
21:19:35 <h01ger> dont belittle the work of the sponsorteam! ;-p
21:19:36 <OdyX> .oO(Without a DC13.ch to organize, I have a 2-weeks walk-trip in the Chinese campaigns to enjoy, sooo …)
21:20:23 <moray> h01ger: please try to stop suggesting people are belittling/not trusting others, that is not really a good way to reach consensus
21:20:54 <h01ger> moray, right. but saying we are ignoring problems is also not fair
21:20:59 <gwolf> h01ger: right. I stand by moray's comment. It is frustrating to find so much acidity when trying to work something out.
21:21:12 <h01ger> exactly
21:21:45 * Y_Plentyn sighs
21:21:46 <OdyX> I re-state my proposal: go with "full two-weeks - but propose MrP to let others rent parts of the place the first week if he can" That's signing A, but proposing him a way to have a fuller first week, which in our both interests.
21:21:47 * fil took that as a joke from h01ger BTW
21:21:58 <h01ger> i'm not ignoring darst, at all.
21:22:17 <OdyX> +is
21:22:22 <OdyX> #save
21:22:27 <OdyX> #info This is getting long…
21:23:10 <gwolf> OdyX: That could be. But just proposing him without making it a formal proposition is maybe too little
21:23:12 <h01ger> (but i do think darst is way to pessimistic/careful in his latest budget)
21:23:17 <gwolf> I understand there is trust with him
21:23:30 <gwolf> But it is not just a minor thing
21:23:33 <OdyX> I understand this is higher than what "camp B" would have hoped, and smaller than "camp A" would like, but I think it's the best proposal we can come out with.
21:23:53 <gwolf> as he must legally block the whole venue for us. If it's not written, he could fear us suing him for accepting people during week 1 or whatever.
21:24:00 <Y_Plentyn> does anybody have a counterproposal?
21:24:08 <OdyX> gwolf: no he mustn't IMHO.
21:24:09 <moray> OdyX: I agree that something like that is the only "consensus" we could get today, but I'm not sure what that means in financial terms
21:24:14 <h01ger> gwolf, please get of the sueing ship. its the wrong one.
21:24:22 <h01ger> ;)
21:24:23 <hug> OdyX: what would we pay? I think it's better to tell him what we really need.
21:24:51 <gwolf> OdyX: I could live with such a proposal,if it is made explicit
21:25:00 <moray> OdyX: and since many people are concerned due to the financial angle, any outcome they will agree on needs to be something that clearly eases the budget risk
21:25:03 <OdyX> hug: we would pay the contractual minimum iff he doesn't find another client for that first week. I think he'll find some, but I'm making assumptions there.
21:25:09 <gwolf> h01ger: ok, forge thte "suing" part. But we do want that request/proposal as something formal and written
21:25:24 <hug> and signing 1 week would be something we could now. without yet another meeting.
21:25:27 <moray> OdyX: but what incentive would he have to look, if we have guaranteed to pay the whole thing anyway?
21:25:28 <gwolf> if he can get 100 people to stay at LeCamp (and substract that money from our due amount) I'm happy.
21:25:28 <h01ger> gwolf, for some values of "we"
21:25:41 <OdyX> moray: more meals, job for his cooks, etc.
21:26:12 <gwolf> h01ger: we as in "at least me and the ⅓ of darst I can speak for" :)
21:26:21 <hug> seems complicated and no real motivation for him.
21:26:34 <OdyX> not my understanding, but I might be wrong.
21:26:38 * h01ger sighs. contract negotiations with a comitee is a nice idea in principle, but maybe not so great in RL. (and i'm talking british here.)
21:26:43 <gwolf> hug: do we have a quote/contract of one week?
21:26:59 <OdyX> It might come as an incentive for us to find a KDE/GNOME/whateva to come hack during the first week
21:27:04 <OdyX> no we don't
21:27:12 * h01ger wishes good luck
21:27:21 <hug> no, my suggestion would be an agreement that we take one week at the same terms or otherwise cancel.
21:27:24 <gwolf> then, no, we cannot sign for one week right now.
21:27:28 <fil> It strikes me that there is a consensus to sign for at least the second week, which means that that should be done, with an explanation that our insane decission making process is still dithering about the first week, and will get back to him shortly
21:27:47 <hug> gives a good point for negotiation.
21:27:53 <OdyX> fil: #define shortly and I'm with you.
21:28:02 <moray> gwolf: the "contract" just has the dates written at the top, so quite easy to change it :)
21:28:05 * h01ger gets strokes as well
21:28:05 <OdyX> make #define shortly one-week and I agree :)
21:28:15 <hug> exactly
21:28:23 <h01ger> fil, "insane decission making process" are words i can sign right now
21:28:59 * Y_Plentyn nods
21:29:16 <OdyX> IMHO that's a non-process, ohwell
21:29:31 <hug> then we can tell him, the internet accepted a one week contract and we could sign now. everything else needa more discussion
21:30:03 <h01ger> hug, the internet is down
21:30:46 <hug> h01ger: did you tell him?
21:30:54 <gaudenz> no it's up and I'm in the train and at least in front of my computer. Cheers!
21:31:01 <OdyX> I think MrP will say no to one-week only. and it's not a situation I want to be in in one week.
21:31:19 * h01ger hasnt talked with mrp in the last 10 days
21:31:25 <Y_Plentyn> ok. hug: we take one week at the same terms or otherwise cancel // odyx: go with "full two-weeks - but propose MrP to let others rent parts
21:31:32 <Y_Plentyn> is there any other position?
21:32:11 <moray> Y_Plentyn: earlier there were also "one week + some buildings" compromises (a different version of odyx's, perhaps)
21:32:16 <hug> there was c)
21:32:21 <h01ger> +crack
21:32:44 <h01ger> and its not getting better as its getting longer
21:32:47 <gaudenz> If everyone agrees that we can sign a 1 week contract option C does not make sense.
21:32:54 <Y_Plentyn> moray: i would prefer a proposal with a name on it
21:33:00 <h01ger> gaudenz, we have been there 30min ago
21:33:03 <Y_Plentyn> and a complete proposal
21:33:12 <gwolf> C does not make sense anymore.
21:34:03 * h01ger points at topic
21:34:07 <pocock> OdyX: if you don't like my `hyopthetical' questions, it is not useful guessing what Mr Pianaro will really say when if give him a signed 1-week contract
21:34:12 <h01ger> i would really us to decide today
21:34:27 <Y_Plentyn> can we put that in an #info?
21:34:36 <h01ger> #info C is dead
21:34:43 <gwolf> #agree C is dead.
21:34:43 <XTaran> #agree C does not make sense anymore.
21:34:58 <XTaran> .oO( So much agreement. Cool. :)
21:35:00 <gaudenz> #save
21:35:11 <OdyX> #agree C++ is the future
21:35:26 <h01ger> *g*
21:35:31 <h01ger> jehova!
21:35:40 <mikam> lol
21:35:40 <OdyX> so we cancel ?
21:35:47 <Y_Plentyn> ok, who is behind which proposal?
21:35:52 <h01ger> OdyX, le camp?
21:35:59 <h01ger> interesting idea.
21:36:02 <OdyX> h01ger: no, the whole thing.
21:36:03 <moray> Y_Plentyn: I'm not really sure what you want to gain from lining up sides
21:36:12 <Y_Plentyn> moray: clearness.
21:36:19 <moray> if we want a decision today, we need something that reaches consensus
21:36:38 <hug> I also prefer consensus
21:36:41 <gwolf> moray: and we need a decision today FWIW
21:36:56 <Y_Plentyn> moray: that is the point. at the moment it seems we are reiterating the same points repeatedly
21:37:03 <pocock> if Mr Pianaro is going to tell us all the terms, then why not ask him to join the team, help raise money, help make a budget to pay himself, etc
21:37:15 <OdyX> pocock: that's _stupid_, sorry.
21:37:18 <Y_Plentyn> that does not create a consensus
21:37:22 <hug> pocock: wtf?
21:37:33 <h01ger> hug, i do prefer a consensus, but i dont think we will have a sensible one. this is why i'd be happier with a non-consenus on + going with plan A
21:38:01 <pocock> OdyX and h01ger have told us that Mr Pianaro is somehow going to overrule any decision this group makes about shortening
21:38:12 <h01ger> but i also think, whatever we decide, in 23m i'll be out
21:38:27 <moray> so if we want consensus, you want us to argue another 23 minutes first?
21:38:28 <h01ger> we will not decide _better_ after >2h
21:38:28 <OdyX> pocock: not overrule; refuse to lent. That has nothing to do with dictating our decisions.
21:38:29 <Y_Plentyn> pocock: as far as I can see this is not completely clear
21:38:29 <gwolf> (for first time in many minutes, I agree with h01ger)
21:38:30 <fil> I presume that we can agree that we're going to sign something with LeCamp (if they let us), and it'll be for at least one week?
21:38:43 <h01ger> gwolf, with what exactly? :)
21:38:48 <gwolf> 22min :)
21:38:51 <h01ger> :)
21:39:00 <hug> the reaaon why I prefer b, is because we can get a bigger debconf for the same budget. and not because i'm scared we don't have enough mone
21:39:02 <Y_Plentyn> pocock: but that does not matter for our desision, we need to take into account that this might happen
21:39:05 <h01ger> fil, except that one week is not really on the table...
21:40:06 <pocock> it will actually be easy for the negotiators if they go away from this meeting with no flexibility
21:40:07 <OdyX> well, it is but with a very high risk.
21:40:09 <hug> we could also go for a, but we'd waste like 30k on the unused venue.
21:40:20 <fil> I'm just tryong to restrict the discussion  to the fact that we have consensus on signing _something_
21:40:26 <gwolf> I don't see a real way to "escape" signing this contract...
21:40:37 <Y_Plentyn> fil: we do not
21:40:37 <h01ger> hug, there will be no waste if we use the venue wisely
21:40:40 <OdyX> there is: not doing dc13.ch and give money back to sponsors.
21:40:41 <gwolf> mainly because of the position of the people most involved
21:40:45 <pocock> if the negotiators say "a) we have authority to sign now, but (b) it is 1 week only", Mr Pianaro may sign
21:40:58 <gwolf> (and I'm not saying you are irresponsible)
21:41:09 <OdyX> pocock: he may, but I think he won't (and I wouldn't in his position)
21:41:23 <moray> I don't understand the reasoning for why he would *not* want a 1-week booking for hundreds of people
21:41:48 <pocock> OdyX: it doesn't matter: this meeting should make a clear decision, and the only thing for the negotiators to do is communicate that decision
21:41:55 <hug> OdyX: why? he knows we're looking at other options
21:42:14 <hug> and we're not paying below his normal prices
21:42:18 <gwolf> I do think you should *try* to get a shorter (or non-exclusive) option
21:42:25 <h01ger> gwolf, been there..
21:42:28 <h01ger> we tried
21:42:30 <h01ger> #sigh
21:42:33 <h01ger> #sigh
21:42:38 <h01ger> and so
21:42:38 <pocock> h01ger: it is different now
21:42:43 <h01ger> i recommend us to decide to sign
21:42:47 <h01ger> #sigh
21:42:58 <hug> it only works if it's a take it or leave it nrgotiation
21:42:59 <gwolf> ... I'm willing to "OK" this thing, but quite reluctantly. But not if no further attempt is made at either B or B'
21:43:00 <pocock> h01ger: when you speak to him this time, you will be telling him that you have authority to sign immediately if he accepts a 1 week booking
21:43:09 <gwolf> Thing is, we need to get this decided
21:43:14 <gwolf> and it has to be in this meeting
21:43:19 <gwolf> we cannot drag this forever
21:43:22 <h01ger> gwolf, yes, for us. not so much for mrp
21:43:24 <OdyX> one week only is no DebCamp, you know that ?
21:43:35 <fil> Y_Plentyn: we don't?  (I thought the options under discussion all involved signing something)
21:43:44 <h01ger> further negoitians with mrp will just make *our* decission imposible / make them take longer
21:43:45 <gwolf> OdyX: I am fully aware of that. Or it can be a shorter DebConf also, as it was in the past.
21:43:46 <pocock> OdyX: telling him that you have a definite authority to sign for 1 week, immediately, may cause him to compromise to get the signature
21:43:48 <h01ger> and risk everything
21:43:56 <gwolf> (my first DebConf+DebCamp was one week)
21:43:59 <h01ger> for the price of motivating the team
21:44:00 <hug> and the decision needs to give authority to the local team to sign under those conditions.
21:44:04 <h01ger> which could work on getting money
21:44:09 <pocock> h01ger: you pointed out many times that .de and .at have options too
21:44:12 <h01ger> this has all been said already
21:44:14 <h01ger> #sigh
21:44:16 <pocock> I've found two other options
21:44:19 <Y_Plentyn> fil: option b seems to be to only sign under conditions
21:44:20 * h01ger shuts up
21:44:33 <gwolf> pocock: please not anymore.
21:44:38 <pocock> we need to stop being afraid of what he might say
21:44:39 <gwolf> pocock: it is at LeCamp.
21:44:45 <Y_Plentyn> fil: which might mean "not sign"
21:44:50 <OdyX> my forevision is we go B, don't get LeCamp and are back to square0 in one week.
21:44:58 <gwolf> pocock: thanks for your hard work. But please stop it.
21:45:03 <h01ger> OdyX-- ;)
21:45:06 <fil> Y_Plentyn: i.e. sign if the let us
21:45:07 <OdyX> and it's not a situation I want to be in in one week.
21:45:48 <h01ger> #topic going in circles. coming to an end, maybe?
21:46:12 <gwolf> OdyX: just mentioning it to him we need this possibility won't make him get get mad and slam the door on us.
21:46:20 <Y_Plentyn> so, we still have the same 2 positions
21:46:24 <gwolf> We won't get thrown back to square0
21:46:25 <OdyX> and I'm afraid of the stupid "oh, but LeCamp would actually be good, finally", in May, when other options we investigated last year turned out to be uglier/more expensive/blah
21:46:28 <h01ger> gwolf, no. and then?
21:46:31 <hug> option b is not without risk but it would give us the best of the venue IMO
21:46:50 <h01ger> gwolf, the "end then?" part is what i would like to decide.
21:47:04 <h01ger> gwolf, the "end then?" part is what i would like to decide on. its clear what we try before
21:47:44 <gwolf> h01ger: at least get something more than the memory of him saying "ok, I'll look if somebody else wants to rent a bed" would help.
21:48:15 <OdyX> gwolf: he'll just say "I told you I wouldn't like one-week, now please sign two weeks or go away"
21:48:23 <hug> we could still say, if they don't agree to b we'd do a full evaluation and not decide until e.g february
21:48:45 <hug> but this is probably not what we want
21:48:52 <OdyX> we'd be lucky if LeCamp is still free by then. And we wouldn't have any trust anymore
21:48:58 <h01ger> gwolf, what OdyX said. now what / and then? (not "end then" :)
21:49:05 <pocock> OdyX: "STOP hypotheticals now, it doesn't help, _at_all_ !"
21:49:12 <pocock> OdyX: we don't know what he will say
21:49:31 <OdyX> pocock: besides we talked to him and he mostly said that already, but ohwell...
21:49:34 <Y_Plentyn> pocock: this goes both ways
21:49:43 <pocock> when you tell him you have authority to sign immediately for 1 week, he may be as happy as some people here to have an end to the circular discussions
21:50:01 <h01ger> gwolf, are you confirmed now? ;)
21:50:06 <pocock> OdyX: it is different when you tell him you have authority to sign immediately
21:50:14 <h01ger> or do we need to keep on?
21:50:48 <h01ger> so
21:51:05 <h01ger> we want to try to negotiate further options... but if that fails, do we agree to sign?
21:51:12 <gaudenz> What if we decide to propose Le Camp 1 week and tell him that we have the authority to accept that if he agrees. But also decide now that if he refuses we will get back to him and agree to 2 weeks (of course not telling him that upfront)
21:51:13 <hug> the question is: do we want to risk a no or prefer to pay for sonething we don't need
21:51:16 <OdyX> the most reasonable mission I'd give to the final negociators would be "go for as flexible of a first week we can get, but make sure to be honest with MrP and get the second week in any case"
21:51:36 <gwolf> right, what gaudenz says
21:51:37 <h01ger> (and anyway, raise money. raise money. raise more money. and raise money again. that *must* be our focus. not this.(!!))
21:51:58 <gwolf> h01ger: if we say right away "ok, we sign for two weeks full", then there is not even much motivation  to try
21:52:03 <h01ger> gaudenz, fine
21:52:10 <gaudenz> OdyX: I'm fine with this if it's clear that we can in the worst case sign the contract we have now for 2 weeks without another meeting.
21:52:17 <gwolf> I prefer to try to do the shortening/lessening/whateverening
21:52:18 <pocock> this is too complicated, that is why it keeps going in circles.  The negotiators should only have authority to sign for 1 week.
21:52:21 <h01ger> OdyX, fine too
21:52:21 <Ganneff> wohoo. debconf1.debconf.org -> now with ipv6 (and on new machine). the rest to follow asap. (to get something nice into here too, sorry for disturbing, im out again)
21:52:22 <OdyX> gaudenz: that's my focus indeed.
21:52:28 <Y_Plentyn> gaudenz: fine
21:52:34 <moray> gaudenz: but there is clearly no consensus for that
21:52:35 <gwolf> if it fails, then mini-meeting (hopefully)
21:52:35 <OdyX> #info debconf1.debconf.org has ipv6.
21:52:36 <hug> gaudenz: this would mean, if there's a no we're back here
21:52:41 <h01ger> Ganneff, whooohoo! glad you're having fun! :-)
21:52:53 <h01ger> Ganneff, & thanks for your work on this!
21:52:54 <gaudenz> And in this case I propose to apoint hug and h01ger as the negotiators.
21:52:55 <h01ger> :-)
21:53:01 <XTaran> OdyX: s/1/13/?
21:53:04 <Ganneff> h01ger: not exactly, but we will have website all moved soonish.
21:53:07 <ana> hi, I have been reading the meeting log, looks like the only way to go is one week, if mr p. tells us go away, he wasn't so much by our side to start with
21:53:14 <hug> ok h01ger is the nice giy
21:53:15 <hug> guy
21:53:20 <gaudenz> With hug I guess also thise being reluctant have some sort of assurance that we wont just sign everything.
21:53:25 <XTaran> Ah, Ganneff woke up from the commit commandline. :)
21:53:54 * h01ger wonders how hug and himself should do the negotiations given the locations - and dont suggest voip or such
21:54:07 <h01ger> i'd trust to defer this to hug
21:54:21 <gwolf> h01ger: if you can defer this to hug, I'm most willing as well
21:54:22 <gaudenz> hug: why? because in the worst case you can even agree to the current contract.
21:54:39 <gaudenz> h01ger: fine with me too to just defer to hug. I trust him.
21:54:44 <hug> I'd prefer to only be authorized to sign 1 week
21:54:45 <moray> gaudenz: there is no consensus for that
21:54:48 <h01ger> hug, yes, the current contract is absolutly signable IMO
21:54:52 <hug> i don't like to lie
21:55:06 <moray> and yes, it's much easier (and nicer) to negotiate truthfully
21:55:13 <OdyX> I like gaudenz's proposal; let's reformulate it with my words: "negotiators can go to LeCamp, try to negotiate the second week + some of the first week as flexible as we can; negotiators are empowered to take the two full weeks if that's their last resort to get LeCamp"
21:55:14 <gaudenz> hug: I don't think you have to lie.
21:55:16 <ana> h01ger: no, we would be dishonest. I think you appreciate mr p more than that
21:55:36 <Y_Plentyn> ana: this guy has been drawn out for about 3 months now - he has some right to be unhappy
21:55:47 <pocock> Odyx: I would veto that.  Negotiators only have authority for 1 week.
21:56:00 <OdyX> pocock: I don't think you have a veto.
21:56:01 <gaudenz> hug: IMO it just normal that you don't tell your "mandate" to the other party upfront.
21:56:03 <ana> Y_Plentyn: it is him who pushed us to sign a contract so early, almost one year!
21:56:05 <gwolf> OdyX: right. And I'd even add, "negotiatiors could connect from LeCamp and ask for emergency gathering/non-meeting if a decision is needed right away" :)
21:56:08 <ana> who wants to push us*
21:56:14 <h01ger> OdyX, would you actually be willing to do the final steps? you're a dc13.ch member, arent you? (i'm not...)
21:56:17 <hug> I'm ok with the authorisation to sign a 1 week contract. everything else goes back to the internet :-)
21:56:22 <gwolf> but we must truthfully try to get a smaller deal
21:56:31 <OdyX> going back to the internet is not going to help.
21:56:34 <pocock> OdyX: if we want consensus, that means anybody can veto
21:56:37 <h01ger> ana, we have been running in these circles for 2h... i dont want us to go back there again
21:56:44 <h01ger> ana, sorry you're late.
21:56:44 <XTaran> ana: Almost one year? Less than 3/4 of a year!
21:56:46 <moray> gwolf: anyway, we should be getting a final contract + formal DPL approval before actual signing
21:56:47 <gwolf> hug: if possible, a 1-week-with-some-buildings-for-the-other-week. But I'm willing to let that go :)
21:56:50 <OdyX> pocock: no, that's not consensus, that's people dictatorship
21:56:54 <moray> gwolf: which means at least brief connection back to discuss
21:56:59 <ana> h01ger: people have been trying to reach concensus, you haven't moved a milimeter
21:57:07 <hug> yeah, that would male sense
21:57:10 <ana> h01ger: I'm not late at all
21:57:11 <XTaran> ana: Not true!
21:57:22 <ana> XTaran: we're late to sign the contract, mr pianaro wanted it like 2 months ago already ...
21:57:37 <gwolf> moray: right, the sume of the people arguing here cannot just sign without the DPL approving. I trust the DPL will approve what we (consensually) approve together...
21:57:38 <moray> so, do we go forward with hug doing this, or decide nothing for today?
21:57:39 <XTaran> ana: Especially in the last ten minutes we're closer to a consensus than ever
21:57:47 * h01ger will leave in 3min..
21:57:52 <OdyX> I can go with hug fwiw.
21:57:53 <h01ger> s/will/wants to/
21:57:58 <XTaran> h01ger: Please don't.
21:58:05 <ana> XTaran: I hope so! :)
21:58:07 * gwolf goes with hug
21:58:11 <moray> h01ger: I would like to start cooking soon :)
21:58:15 <hug> OdyX: sounsa goos
21:58:18 * h01ger hugs ana too
21:58:21 <hug> sounds goos
21:58:22 * ana hugs hug
21:58:24 <gwolf> moray: Regina already is waiting for 90 minutes for me.. .so... :)
21:58:25 <moray> hugs all round
21:58:28 <gwolf> #agree HUG!
21:58:29 <hug> damn mobile phone
21:58:48 <gwolf> #agree hug will try to negotiate a shorter contract, with the possibility of smaller-scale rental for DebCamp
21:58:49 <OdyX> if that's the only thing we can get, I'd be okay with one-week + resort to internet, but I'd be happy to have more latitude.
21:59:06 <moray> _
21:59:06 <moray> | |__  _   _  __ _
21:59:06 <moray> | '_ \| | | |/ _` |
21:59:06 <moray> | | | | |_| | (_| |
21:59:06 <moray> |_| |_|\__,_|\__, |
21:59:09 <moray> |___/
21:59:17 <h01ger> we also agreed hug can sign 2 weeks as "last meassure", right?
21:59:24 <gwolf> h01ger: no
21:59:29 <hug> gwolf: no, hug is authorized to sign a 1 week contract with some extra buildings
21:59:30 <h01ger> SIGH
21:59:33 <h01ger> äh
21:59:34 <h01ger> #SIGH
21:59:37 <gwolf> h01ger: hug can connect and check with us
21:59:43 <OdyX> who "us" ?
21:59:44 * h01ger shakes head
21:59:47 <gaudenz> This is stupid.
21:59:54 <h01ger> this is insane even
21:59:58 <OdyX> resort-to-internet will not help at all...
22:00:04 <rafw> this is dangerous in my opinion.
22:00:13 <gaudenz> I think if we defer to hug he should have full autority, even to decide to not sign anything at all.
22:00:18 <XTaran> gwolf, hug: I understood the proposal with the last resort of signing two weeks
22:00:22 <Y_Plentyn> ok... the 2 positions are still the same, and the proponents still have not moved
22:00:30 <gwolf> Well - In any case...
22:00:31 <moray> so, do we go forward with hug doing this, or decide nothing for today?
22:00:48 <gwolf> ...
22:00:55 <h01ger> ... indeed
22:00:56 <OdyX> "negotiators can go to LeCamp, try to negotiate the second week + some of the first week as flexible as we can; negotiators are empowered to take the two full weeks if that's their last resort to get LeCamp"  with s/negotiators/hug + another negotiator/g ?
22:01:02 <gaudenz> Y_Plentyn: I have moved in so far that I defer to hug to even not sign at all if he thinks that's the most sensible thing to do.
22:01:06 <gwolf> h01ger: right. decided to erase my own words...
22:01:26 <ana> we have to say something to le camp, so I think sending hug with autorization to sign one week and being honest with mr pianaro is a good compromise
22:01:31 <Y_Plentyn> gaudenz: ok
22:01:43 <pocock> just to be clear: hug is not authorised to sign a 2 week contract without another meeting first?
22:01:46 <hug> ana: ack
22:01:56 <h01ger> enjoy. call me back when we have a venue. i did what i could for this
22:01:56 <gwolf> pocock: I would say a mini-meeting
22:02:05 <XTaran> pocock: nack.
22:02:12 <XTaran> pocock: See 23:01:06 <OdyX>
22:02:16 <gwolf> not a scheduled blah
22:02:21 * h01ger pleas the team to authorize hug to sign for 2 weeks as well
22:02:26 <hug> I only want to be authorized to sign 1 week
22:02:28 <Y_Plentyn> ok, so oxyx and h01ger seem to still propose A
22:02:31 <pocock> Xtaran: that was not a decision, that was Odyx refusing to budge
22:02:40 <OdyX> a mini-meeting is not a meeting, it's an IRC query to a crowd
22:02:41 <gwolf> I agree with hug not wanting the two weeks
22:02:46 <XTaran> pocock: That was the proposal.
22:02:51 <h01ger> basically i also vote against any other decission with my hat.
22:03:00 <gwolf> I think that if hug cannot achieve the cutting, we won't have much choice but to sign one
22:03:10 <h01ger> but if we are in this voting game after 2h, i'm out. sorry.
22:03:10 <gwolf> (sorry, to sign as it is)
22:03:25 <moray> gwolf: can we rephrase it from "full two weeks" to "option that he is happy with or budget" or similar
22:03:26 * h01ger is damn tired and overwroked
22:03:28 <ana> gwolf: there are still people with energy for looking for another venue
22:03:32 <gwolf> so I think that hug will be de-facto allowed - but he does not want to
22:03:41 <h01ger> and we have been going in circles since an hour
22:03:42 <XTaran> ana: Besides pocock?
22:03:43 <gwolf> moray: I am willing to, but he must agree to have that power
22:03:44 <ana> XTaran: yes
22:03:49 * h01ger waves
22:03:54 <Y_Plentyn> just for the record:  i am with h01ger
22:03:55 <XTaran> h01ger: :(
22:04:00 <gwolf> ana: No. I don't want to think about other venues. Sorry.
22:04:01 <OdyX> I'm not very happy to have hug go alone, mostly for his sanity.
22:04:16 <XTaran> OdyX++
22:04:17 <ana> gwolf: why?
22:04:18 <gwolf> OdyX: (you mean he already lost it for accepting? :) )
22:04:45 <gwolf> ana: (see my mail from ~2:30 ago, and the reasoning at the beginning of the meeting)
22:04:47 <OdyX> gwolf: hug + h01ger was a more balanced duo than hug alone :)
22:04:56 <hug> i will not go alone
22:05:01 <pocock> how many people believe hug should not have authority to sign for two weeks?  (me + ?)
22:05:03 <n0rman> OdyX++ hug needs to go with another dc member
22:05:16 <gwolf> hug: who are you going with then?
22:05:23 <OdyX> gismo, heiserhorn ^ ?
22:05:29 <gaudenz> I propose that hug can select someone else to go with him at his own discretion.
22:05:33 <moray> pocock: I don't think it makes sense when e.g. darst wasn't happy with that, i.e. it's not part of any consensus view
22:05:38 <ana> gwolf: I didn't find any strong argument there
22:05:46 <moray> pocock: and I'm still not happy with it until darst and hug are
22:06:28 <h01ger> pocock, please shut up, else there is /kick
22:06:34 <gaudenz> If hug want's me to I'm ready to go to le camp with him.
22:06:35 <OdyX> I think we're far better off with a 2weeks LeCamp than in mid-november without a venue.
22:06:40 <fil> moray: I think darst handed out proxies, so talking about what he wanted is moot
22:06:43 <OdyX> same as gaudenz.
22:06:44 <h01ger> hug, how should i go with you?
22:06:50 <h01ger> come to .ch?
22:06:51 <moray> fil: I'm not talking about a vote today
22:07:02 <OdyX> we're soon tomorrow.
22:07:05 <moray> fil: which would not be at all valid anyway
22:07:29 <XTaran> OdyX: Depends on the location.
22:07:47 <hug> h01ger: not sure whats best.. we can decide later who goes
22:07:54 <fil> moray: quite, but really, if a consensus had been reached without darst, would you make that argument, and if so, why are we even bothering
22:08:11 <gismo> OdyX: to be clear, IIRC DebConf13.ch requires two members of the board to sign
22:08:21 <OdyX> gismo: good point.
22:08:48 <OdyX> The minimum consensus is "grant debconf13 association to go check with DPL for one week only". People are fighting to get "if only that is possible, two weeks"
22:08:52 <hug> so consensus: authorized for 1 week. 2 week needa at least agreement on irc
22:08:53 <gwolf> hug: h01ger does not need to physically go. If a decision to sign for the two weeks is needed, I guess he can commit to it by phone or so :)
22:09:10 <gaudenz> gismo	correct
22:09:13 <moray> hug: can't we make it "two weeks full booking" there?
22:09:26 <moray> hug: i.e. authorisation to book 1 week full + 1 week partial if that's what you want?
22:09:39 <h01ger> +if membership really has no obligations, i could also become a member. but for photo album value i think gismo should be the 2nd one signing ;)
22:09:42 <moray> depending which the wonderful le camp peopel prefer
22:09:44 <FBI> debconf-data: 3 joerg committed revision 3890 to debconf-data: copy stylesheets and favicons too
22:09:44 <FBI> debconf-data: files changed: U   dc10/website/ttreerc
22:09:45 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc11/website/ttreerc
22:09:46 <hug> moray: makes sense
22:09:47 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc8/website/ttreerc
22:09:49 <FBI> debconf-data: U   dc9/website/ttreerc
22:09:56 <gismo> h01ger: I am not a member
22:10:02 <hug> we need 2 dc13 board members
22:10:11 <h01ger> lol
22:10:18 <h01ger> so
22:10:21 <OdyX> basically, any two of the locals besides gismo
22:10:25 <h01ger> who are the lucky ones?
22:10:26 <heiserhorn> i can sign
22:10:41 <OdyX> any of hug, heiserhorn and OdyX + any other one
22:10:51 <hug> whos's most comfortable in german?
22:10:54 <gwolf> (yay, meeting seems to be about to finish - With many issues still to talk, but yay!)
22:11:07 <h01ger> hug, current contract is in english+french
22:11:10 <OdyX> ( and we need a debconf13 association board meeting formally )
22:11:17 <h01ger> hehe
22:11:39 <hug> discussion  will be in german
22:11:51 <OdyX> the who doesn't really matter, IMHO. It will be whoever can go with hug.
22:11:56 <gaudenz> I propose to do the board meeting just afterwards by mail by everyone stating that they give the same authorisation for negotation as this meeting decides.
22:11:57 <XTaran> gwolf: Isn't that worth a #topic or at least #info?
22:12:00 <pocock> h01ger: it is not helpful telling me to shut up when you don't understand something
22:12:02 <hug> any other changes to the contract?
22:12:03 <h01ger> hug, so heiserhorn?
22:12:07 <ana> if the contract is in french and the discussion is in german, we need a german speaker and a french speaker. heiserhorn and hug, the h-team sounds OK
22:12:12 <XTaran> #info we need a debconf13 association board meeting formally
22:12:25 <moray> (did we finish 12 minutes ago yet?)
22:12:26 <h01ger> XTaran, anybody can do #info, oh, hi, thanks! :)
22:12:27 <OdyX> if heiserhorn's german is good enough :)
22:12:36 <heiserhorn> OdyX: your is better
22:12:37 <h01ger> moray, i have my boots on... ;)
22:12:46 <OdyX> we have kevinmoilar who has a good french too
22:12:54 <kevinmoilar> hehe
22:13:01 <hug> I understand enough french to read the contract.
22:13:01 <XTaran> #info [gwolf] meeting seems to be about to finish - With many issues still to talk
22:13:10 <h01ger> OdyX, heiserhorn: you'll both get deutschstunden at debconf13 ;p
22:13:11 <gwolf> Guys... Thanks to all for a hard meeting... but that (I think) did manage to advance a very hard topic
22:13:12 <moray> well, at worst they can email/phone a francophone
22:13:14 * h01ger hides in some corner
22:13:19 <gwolf> XTaran: we all want this meeting to be over now.
22:13:24 <OdyX> h01ger: my german's not that bad :)
22:13:33 <moray> are we nearly there yet?
22:13:38 <XTaran> gwolf: I'm fine. :)
22:13:41 <gwolf> #question is the meeting over yet?
22:13:42 <OdyX> can someone #info the consensus ?
22:13:49 <OdyX> before marking it over ?
22:13:51 <moray> hug probably should
22:13:54 <gaudenz> or even better #agreed
22:13:55 <hug> so we accept the contract as is for 1 week?
22:13:58 <moray> so we can check we agree with what he understands himself
22:13:59 * XTaran can confirm OdyX's German is not so bad. :)
22:14:12 <hug> everyone happy with tents and co.
22:14:17 <h01ger> OdyX, as other people like to say: my germans are fine. all two of them ;)
22:14:28 <gwolf> hug: yes. Ideally, with the option ot rent some buildings for the other week.
22:14:42 <OdyX> hug: 1 week, then negotiate for the other week, last-resort two weeks only happens by phone with debconf chairs ?
22:15:33 <gaudenz> OdyX: sounds fine for me.
22:15:35 <heiserhorn> If someone is willing to go is best for me, but if noone else can I will go.
22:15:36 <hug> ok
22:15:52 <moray> hug: please #info something
22:16:08 <moray> then I think I will join the "running away from the computer" club
22:16:13 <ana> hug: it would be nice getting some things promised that are not in the contract in the contract, but I leave that to your discrection
22:16:22 <gaudenz> #agreed hug has the mandate to negotiate with le camp: 1 week, then negotiate for the other week, last-resort two weeks only happens by phone with debconf chairs ?
22:16:37 <OdyX> #agree consensus for the LeCamp final negotiation is: Sign one week if possible; if not negotiate the best deal you can for the DebCamp week. If only two weeks is agreeable, last-resort is a phone call with DebConf chairs.
22:16:37 <gwolf> #save
22:16:39 <OdyX> damn
22:16:52 <XTaran> Congrats! :)
22:16:55 <OdyX> ffffew
22:16:58 <gwolf> :D !
22:17:14 * h01ger roles eyes
22:17:27 <h01ger> really? we made it?
22:17:30 <XTaran> h01ger: So bad?
22:17:30 <OdyX> yay.
22:17:33 <gwolf> seems only chairs can #agree
22:17:37 <gwolf> #agree consensus for the LeCamp final negotiation is: Sign one week if possible; if not negotiate the best deal you can for the DebCamp week. If only two weeks is agreeable, last-resort is a phone call with DebConf chairs.
22:17:42 <gwolf> #endmeeting PHEW!