On Mittwoch, 7. November 2012, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
This mail is an example of what I *DON'T* want DebConf to become. As
they are the ones paying, these people should be listened to very
closely... NO. Not at all. If you are a paying professional, we will
thank you from the bottom of our heart.
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 10:50:13PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Daniel Pocock dijo [Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 02:39:48PM +0100]:
(...)
It may be worth surveying those people who paid the fee in the last 2 years:
- do they prefer to only pay `actual per-person cost', or paying a full
600 CHF is
On 07/11/12 09:15, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Mittwoch, 7. November 2012, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
This mail is an example of what I *DON'T* want DebConf to become. As
they are the ones paying, these people should be listened to very
closely... NO. Not at all. If you are a paying professional, we will
Hi,
The budget is hotly debated before the meeting tomorrow. I think that
in a lot of ways, this is a proxy for other, unrelated issues about
venue selection. I would like to stay out of that argument, since we
need some somewhat objective data, and also I have a history of not
even going to
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 11:18:20PM +0100, Gaudenz Steinlin wrote:
OK I did a bit more than basic math. I have commited my version of the
budget to the SVN repository as budget-gaudenz.ods. I made those changes
to darst budget:
- I added one platinum sponsor as this is now confirmed (also
On 07/11/12 09:40, Richard Darst wrote:
Le camp won't bankrupt us. Even under the worst projections, we can
simply reduce the number of sponsored attendees, which reduces the
food cost. At worst case (not that it would be here), we could pay
only the forfait, and have a number of attendees
* Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org [2012-11-06 21:19]:
At the risk of repeating myself: we should not provide late travel
sponsorship, *at all*. It's an inefficient use of funds. If we can't
provide travel sponsorship in a timely manner, *don't* provide travel
sponsorship - save the money
Hi,
so in the beginning of my switzerland visit I was thinking why I was there and
that this why should be documented. So let's do this here for now, and then I
plan to put this into the wiki under Category:DebConfManual.
So what's the purpose of these venue/country pre-visits which we have
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 12:08:02PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
At the risk of repeating myself: we should not provide late travel
sponsorship, *at all*. It's an inefficient use of funds. If we can't
provide travel sponsorship in a timely manner, *don't* provide travel
sponsorship - save
On Mittwoch, 7. November 2012, Richard Darst wrote:
There are all sorts of predictions for the amount of money we will
get, with most centered on 150% to 200% of DC12 amount (90 -- 120
kCHF).
comparing sponsorship for Nicaragua with Switzerland is just not useful.
Switzerland is an
Hi Richard,
Thank you for your analysis. I have only two points :
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 03:40:18AM -0500, Richard Darst wrote:
There are all sorts of predictions for the amount of money we will
get, with most centered on 150% to 200% of DC12 amount (90 -- 120
kCHF). Most locals predict
On 06.11.2012 23:55, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Those are manageable debts
The Le Camp contract seems more like a blank cheque with no upper bound.
There will need to be clear procedures defined explaining who is
authorised to give the head counts for meals each day, etc, and we will
need to track
Hi there,
I am writing about CHF 39k sponsorship money committed and the venue.
First, I came to this project when I read the news :On February 20,
2012, the DebConf committee decided that DebConf13, the Debian developer
conference of 2013, should take place on the shores of the Lake
Neuchātel
On 07/11/12 11:55, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
Anyway, on the budget discussion I don't remember a lot of discussion
about talk room setup. IIRC in Le Camp we have some free infrastructure,
and we can put anywhing we want. Is it the same in Interlaken? (I ask,
because this is a critical point:
On 07/11/12 11:55, Raphaël Walther wrote:
Hi there,
I am writing about CHF 39k sponsorship money committed and the venue.
First, I came to this project when I read the news :On February 20,
2012, the DebConf committee decided that DebConf13, the Debian developer
conference of 2013, should
On 07/11/12 12:25, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
On 07.11.2012 12:04, Daniel Pocock wrote:
On 07/11/12 11:55, Giacomo Catenazzi wrote:
Anyway, on the budget discussion I don't remember a lot of discussion
about talk room setup. IIRC in Le Camp we have some free infrastructure,
and we can put
Richard Darst dijo [Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 03:24:23AM -0500]:
This mail is an example of what I *DON'T* want DebConf to become. As
they are the ones paying, these people should be listened to very
closely... NO. Not at all. If you are a paying professional, we will
I interpreted this as
Daniel Pocock dijo [Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 09:24:57AM +0100]:
I never said we should make a DebConf just for the rich, I'm just
suggesting that we need to take a balanced approach and listen to
different groups.
The current approach seems to be 2 or 3 locals won't come if it's not Le
Camp,
On 07/11/12 15:00, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Daniel Pocock dijo [Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 09:24:57AM +0100]:
I never said we should make a DebConf just for the rich, I'm just
suggesting that we need to take a balanced approach and listen to
different groups.
The current approach seems to be 2 or 3
Not an anser per se, but just a thank you for this mail. It
summarizes many important points we all feel/know by now. I completely
back what you wrote. And it makes me clearly understand why the
pre-visits are so important! (i.e. they are not just ways to justify
further travel for the chairs!
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 08:22:20AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Not an anser per se, but just a thank you for this mail. It
summarizes many important points we all feel/know by now.
+1
I've seen a lot of people get angry in the last couple of weeks, and
it's not been helping (anyone|anything).
I
On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 11:25:37AM +0100, Ana Guerrero wrote:
On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 12:08:02PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
At the risk of repeating myself: we should not provide late travel
sponsorship, *at all*. It's an inefficient use of funds. If we can't
provide travel sponsorship
On 2012-11-07 08:40, Richard Darst wrote:
Le camp won't bankrupt us. Even under the worst projections, we can
simply reduce the number of sponsored attendees, which reduces the
food cost. At worst case (not that it would be here), we could pay
only the forfait, and have a number of attendees
I have added an approximate translation of the current Le Camp contract
proposal to SVN:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/debconf-data/dc13/accounting/contracts/Le_Camp/Contrat%20Debconf13%20-%2030-10-2012%20-%20translation?revision=3828view=markup
In the meeting earlier Holger suggested to try
24 matches
Mail list logo
