Hi Gaudenz, and thanks for this discussion (re)start;
Le dimanche, 17 mars 2013 22.36:52, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
It was pointed out several times, that filling the largest rooms at Le
Camp to their maximum capacity might be unacceptable. I agree with this
and propose to fill the 3 largest
Hi Gaudenz,
Le dimanche, 17 mars 2013 22.37:01, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
I propose that we only allow upgrades to more comfortable rooms for
sponsored attendees at the Front-Desk on-site for a fee
I changed my mind here: I do agree that it's the easiest.
Cheers,
OdyX
signature.asc
Hi Gaudenz, and thanks for this discussion (re)start;
Le dimanche, 17 mars 2013 22.36:59, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
I propse we offer the following options:
1) Sponsored accomodation and food:
With this option you don't pay anything and get a bed in a large or
medium sleeping-bag room and
Hi
Didier 'OdyX' Raboud o...@debian.org writes:
Hi Gaudenz, and thanks for this discussion (re)start;
Le dimanche, 17 mars 2013 22.36:59, Gaudenz Steinlin a écrit :
I propse we offer the following options:
1) Sponsored accomodation and food:
With this option you don't pay anything and get
We will find unacceptable lines with each of the proposals. But it is
not the right time to get too much into the details on how and what
offers to make - Lets first decide on the bids. Stating the visa
problem is enough for now. We should later come to decisions on how to
implement a workaround
Hi,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
Agreed that it is possible to subtract from the stats those people who
already have a 10 year US visa.
I'm mostly staying out of this decision because I'm too busy, as I said, but -
many of the visas that got approved in
Hi,
Based on the outcome of the Doodle poll, even with some missing
participants, the date/time preferred by most is on Friday March 22,
17:00UTC. So, some points:
- The meeting will be public, in #debconf-team as usual
- An express invitation to attend goes to all committee members
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:28:52AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
We will find unacceptable lines with each of the proposals. But it is
not the right time to get too much into the details on how and what
offers to make - Lets first decide on the bids. Stating the visa
problem is enough for now. We
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 05:16:22PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
[... a lot of stuff removed...]
Could you please re-read my email? I said it had nothing to do with the
on-going discussion w.r.t USA. I think Daniel got very sensible answers
and he should realize now it is time to stop.
Le lundi, 18 mars 2013 17.32:12, Ana Guerrero a écrit :
I think Daniel got very sensible answers
and he should realize now it is time to stop.
So we do agree, great!
Ignoring some stuff because you think they will be solved or workarounded
later is not a good
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 05:50:41PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
Ignoring some stuff because you think they will be solved or workarounded
later is not a good idea at the choosing bid stage as we have seen this
year.
I didn't understand from Gunnar's mail that he is ignoring the
Moray Allan dijo [Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:54:19PM +0300]:
On 2013-03-18 18:43, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
- We should try to keep the meeting at a maximum of 1 hour. As it has
happened in the past, if we feel we cannot reach a decision, we
should suspend and call for another meeting in 1-2 weeks
Ana Guerrero dijo [Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:11:57PM +0100]:
My comment is meta to what Gunnar is saying:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:28:52AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
We will find unacceptable lines with each of the proposals. But it is
not the right time to get too much into the details on
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:20:32AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Ana Guerrero dijo [Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:11:57PM +0100]:
My comment is meta to what Gunnar is saying:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:28:52AM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
We will find unacceptable lines with each of the proposals.
On 2013-03-18 20:15, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I do feel that, given that we have slipped quite a bit on our
schedule
*and* that we have got acknowledgements from both teams *and* that
questions have been actively raised on the lists for the last week at
least (and a call for further questions is
On 2013-03-18 20:25, Moray Allan wrote:
In addition to that, there are a number of extra steps that need to
be done before the decision meeting, including extra documents to be
posted to the list by the bids. It doesn't (for example) seem fair
to
me to ask the bids at short notice to rush out
Moray Allan dijo [Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:49:17PM +0300]:
In case it's not clear:
I would be happy for the second meeting to be only a few days later,
if that can be arranged, if teams feel that they won't have any
significant additional answers to give after that. So I'm not
suggesting a
Quoting Gunnar Wolf (gw...@gwolf.org):
Hi,
Based on the outcome of the Doodle poll, even with some missing
participants, the date/time preferred by most is on Friday March 22,
17:00UTC. So, some points:
Ouch. Either I messed up with Doodle...or there was no other
possibility, but that time
Hi Jimmy,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:29:15AM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
There were of course some visa denials, but way fewer than feared, and we
did have approvals even from countries where the worries were strongest
(e.g. Venezuela and Central America).
I would actually not have
Le lundi, 18 mars 2013 18.11:57, Ana Guerrero a écrit :
E.g. I find the hotels prices in Venezuela extremely high, I could ignore
that point thinking we can find a workaround with cheaper hotels later and
focus in the bid overall. Later, it can happen that the venezuelan team
agrees in looking
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 07:45:22PM +0100, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
I'm not sure it's the right place, time and thread to further debate that
subject, though.
No, it is not. But shouldn't we try to avoid future problems? That's what
I'm trying here.
As you might have noticed I stopped
Can the DC13 committee provide any update on exposure to EUR?
Friday's night's Cyprus heist[1] (also referred to as a bank robbery in
some of the press) has raised serious questions over the trustworthiness
and consistency of those running EUR.
In particular, are any Eurozone sponsors on a
Hi Steve,
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:27:46AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 11:29:15AM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
There were of course some visa denials, but way fewer than feared, and we
did have approvals even from countries where the worries were strongest
(e.g.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 09:50:28AM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
And just writing off those people who resent the idea of being
fingerprinted like a criminal as `conscientious objectors' is not
helpful.
What is not helpful is your attempting to draw the bid team into a
protracted argument about
On 18/03/13 20:24, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
While Daniel Pocock is technically right about the structure of US visa law
where the burden is on the applicant to prove nonimmigrant intent, he's wrong
about hard it was overall for DebConf10 visa applicants to overcome that
burden.
I didn't make
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:41:54PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
In the case of those people denied visas, were they sponsored? Did they
have financial losses and was it possible to compensate them?
I don't think DebConf10 sponsored those fees in that situation - but I really
don't remember.
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 03:59:01PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:41:54PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
In the case of those people denied visas, were they sponsored? Did they
have financial losses and was it possible to compensate them?
I don't think DebConf10
I've run a more detailed cost comparison for the Portland bid,
projecting for 200 attendees and 350 attendees separately, so it's
easier to see the base costs, and also incorporating some changes from
the discussion feedback. See the attached ODS file. (The cost per
attendee seems radically lower
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 01:24:35PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 03:59:01PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:41:54PM +0100, Daniel Pocock wrote:
In the case of those people denied visas, were they sponsored? Did they
have financial losses
On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 01:05:22PM -0700, Holger Levsen wrote:
On Sonntag, 17. März 2013, Christian PERRIER wrote:
About this topic : from my own experience, I would advise *against*
targeting a big conference room, except maybe for opening/closing
sessions (ok, that puts aside the
On 03/18/2013 01:37 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
If the Committee wants us to refine the venue cost estimates for a different
configuration before making a decision, I'm happy to do that. FWIW, if we
had to rent the Ballroom for the whole week that would double our venue
costs - but to rent it
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 08:25:35PM +0300, Moray Allan wrote:
On 2013-03-18 20:15, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
I do feel that, given that we have slipped quite a bit on our
schedule
*and* that we have got acknowledgements from both teams *and* that
questions have been actively raised on the lists for
Hi Daniel,
Le lundi, 18 mars 2013 20.14:41, Daniel Pocock a écrit :
Can the DC13 committee provide any update on exposure to EUR?
First, there's no such thing as a DC13 commitee [0]. I'll try to answer
anyway without any particular hat, but with facts.
AFAIK we do have a Postfinance EUR
On 18/03/13 22:54, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
sponsors), but let's say not much.
That's good news
If CHF is unshackled from EUR between now and August, what is the impact on
DC13?
As we have been proactively moving funds to Switzerland (and to CHF) and as
we
expect most expenses to
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 01:41:50PM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
I've run a more detailed cost comparison for the Portland bid,
projecting for 200 attendees and 350 attendees separately, so it's
easier to see the base costs, and also incorporating some changes from
the discussion feedback. See
On 03/18/2013 03:12 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
FWIW, looking this over I realize there was a mistake in the bid page: the
$66/night listed for The Broadway was per-room, not per-person. I've fixed
this now in the wiki page.
Ah, okay, updated in the spreadsheet too.
I'm not sure how the
On 2013-03-19 00:11, Steve Langasek wrote:
For my edification, does extra documents refer to this?:
For the decision meeting, bid teams prepare:
A description of how their bid meets each of the points on the
priority
list.
A description of the weak points in their own bids.
On 2013-03-18 21:31, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
Ok - So, we basically agree. My option was to have the meeting and,
if
everything was finalized enough, we could come out with a winner
bid. If not (and that's the most probable outcome), the second
meeting
is still warranted.
I really don't want to
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 03:45:07PM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
I'm not sure how the totals are arrived on the Comparison page; the numbers
look low to me even without including the venue and other non-per-person
costs. Can you elaborate on the math here?
Venue rental for 4 days plus food
On 03/18/2013 05:49 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 03:45:07PM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:
Probably not - we can mine the data from past conferences to get a better
model for what percentage of attendees will be eating the cafeteria food at
any given time. (We'll want
Christian PERRIER dijo [Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 07:00:48PM +0100]:
Based on the outcome of the Doodle poll, even with some missing
participants, the date/time preferred by most is on Friday March 22,
17:00UTC. So, some points:
Ouch. Either I messed up with Doodle...or there was no other
41 matches
Mail list logo
