Le mercredi, 2 octobre 2019, 23.33:10 h CEST Sam Hartman a écrit : > >>>>> "Didier" == Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <o...@debian.org> writes: > >> TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of > >> batching together travel reimbursement requests. > > Didier> Yes, but… I think we, as a project, need to be clear about > Didier> what this means, along at least three axes. > > Didier> First: what types of events qualify for travel > Didier> reimbursement? You have mentioned BSPs, but would a > Didier> miniDebConf also qualify? Of course, it is the expectation > Didier> that miniDebConf attendees attend to "enhance Debian"; but > Didier> also that they might present, or attend talks, > Didier> presentations, etc; during which they are not (should not > Didier> be) hunting bugs. I think such micro- conferences, although > Didier> not explicitly Bug Squashing Parties, should also benefit. > > Seriously, I think it is well established that (mini) DebConfs are > available for travel reimbursements. I think the procedures for > mini-DebConfs and sprints are reasonably well understood and working > well, so I wasn't planning on revisiting them at this time.
I realize I had not read https://wiki.debian.org/Sprints/HowTo recently; my bad. It has: > Debian, within the limit of available resources, tries hard to cover travel > and accommodation costs for those who have no other means to cover the > costs. Participating in developer sprints should be no personal financial > burden to any of the participants. Usually, participants are expected to > cover food costs by themselves, although exceptions might be considered. Thanks for the reminder; this makes sense. > I strongly believe that Debian should be about free software. Every > time we mix in some other issue, we reduce our contributor base and > dilute our mission. For that reason I'm not in favor of Debian making > environmental preferences like preferring more expensive train travel > over cheaper flights. Very fair point. On one hand I concur totally with the "Debian is about free software only" argument. But on the other hand, I don't think it is wise for Debian to completely ignore the growing ecological concerns, and the environmental impact Debian (and its infrastructure, events, etc) has. But I understand (and can live with) where you (and others) want to draw this line. > From personal experience I note that trains are a lot less accessible to > people who are blind (and quite possibly a number of other disabilities > in some areas of the world) than planes. I was not aware of this, so thank you for making this concern known to me. > You can say that you'd make exceptions for disabilities. What I actually wanted to say was that I'd be willing to make exceptions; but didn't say which would be "good" or "bad" exceptions. There are various good reasons for exceptions; but you rightfully point out that justifying some of these (because of too restrictive conditions) can be prohibitive. So: less rules leads to less exceptions, I guess? > Didier> So what I'd would enjoy to see is exchanges along the lines > Didier> of: > > Didier> - BSP Orga: hey DPL; we organize a 3-days/2-nights BSP and > Didier> would like to support travel for potential attendees. We > Didier> expect about 12 travel requests; what can you do for us? - > > I'd much rather event organizers come with a rough budget. > As DPL I certainly don't have time or desire to put together a budget > for someone. Fair enough. But then I wonder what guidelines will be used to grant, amend, or deny travel support budgets. Surely not "any" budget is fine (or is it)? I tend to think it'd be of great support for the BSP organizers to know in which ballpark the travel support budget should fall. Best regards, OdyX
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.