Same as before, one reply by a late-joiner to all previous e-mails:
also sprach Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> [2014-08-30 21:49 +0200]:
> There are a few styles of venue that have worked well for DebConf.
DC15 will once again be self-contained, though a bit closer to
civilisation than DC13. Regardless, we are going to be working hard
to portrait the image that the accomodation is fine for everyone,
and we probably won't make arrangements with nearby hotels.
I personally think it's ridiculous to foster the needs of
"corporates" to stay in fluffy hotels, and one of the best
conferences I ever attended had me sleep on a inflatable mattress in
a public school library next to the New Zealand minister of finance.
But whatever, people are people and entitled to their own
desires</rant>
The two styles of DebConf are: all-in-one, or in a city. Both have
benefits, and both can be really cool. Portland was amazing, for
instance, even though I generally prefer everything on site, which
is more inclusive.
So I'd say this is like with the timing: get a venue and then we'll
make it happen any way.
I suppose given that travel to Capetown will be arduous for most
attendees, however, strong preference should be given to airport
proximity.
> I can't think of any venues like this around Cape Town, although
> they probably exist.
For DC15, we did a completely breadth-first exploration of all
possibilities:
https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf15/Germany/VenueScouting
This proved to be highly valuable and motivational for the team, who
set out to submit a bid only if we would find a "perfect" venue.
This also proved to be very advantageous in later venue
negotiations, because we simply had alternatives and a lot of
information.
> IIRC, in the past, there have been DebConfs where the
> accommodation wasn't within short walking distance, and required
> shuttles. This isn't ideal, but is manageable.
We did? Shuttles? ;)
I don't know about South African standards, but at least for the
Swedish DC15 bid, we ruled this out due to cost, inconvenience, and
the effect it would have on the conference.
also sprach Neil Muller <drnlmuller+debian@gmail.com> [2014-08-31 10:43 +0200]:
> Of the Stellenbosch University options, over the last few years it's
> been the least hassle to arrange to use the STAIS conference centre
> (http://stias.ac.za/catering_unlimited/venues_CU.html) since they are
> keen to see that venue used and push it quite hard. This allows for
> around 300 people, although I've no idea what the current costs are.
>
> It's possible to use the lecture halls, but that usually requires
> support from one of the academic departments and scheduling when
> they're not otherwise in use.
We had a simple template to establish initial contact with sites:
https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf15/Germany/VenueScouting/Anschreiben
If there is interest, I'd be happy to translate this to English.
also sprach Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> [2014-08-31 19:00 +0200]:
> The attitude I got was very "what's in it for us?", we probably
> need to find some political heavy hitter in the university, to
> champion our cause. The bureaucracy is thick.
I can't tell you anything about how things are in ZA, but I can tell
you that roughly half of all DebConfs were held at universities, and
there are good reasons, obviously, for it. For a start, Free
Software is the only type of Software ready to withstand Academic
Rigour ;).
I know this is not helpful per se, but it might be useful in
a discussion.
Immediate benefits for the university are exposure of its students
and staff, and international credit, which does interest some of
them nowadays. I am pretty sure that PSU will be able to use the
fact that they hosted DC14 to their advantage, if they are half-way
smart about it.
also sprach Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> [2014-08-31 22:55 +0200]:
> > What is the pro's and cons of a self-contained "summer camp for geeks" vs "How
> > easy/convenient is the proposed place to get all strange and regular kinds
> > of hardware?" (from the LocationChecklist
> > <https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/LocationCheckList>)
>
> Pros:
> * Everyone stays on the venue, so the event is more productive for
> collaboration. People are more likely to connect with people they
> wouldn't otherwise, rather than drifting out into town with groups of
> existing friends.
> * Security
> * We don't need shuttles or anything like that.
> * Locals will be less likely to stay at home, and rather stay in the
> conference accommodation.
>
> Cons:
> * People experience less of the city.
> * (semi-)organised trips into the city may be necessary for people who
> need hardware, etc.
> * There's less diversity of food (and beer), for attendees.
> * People who don't stay in the venue will be far more disconnected.
This is nicely summarised. The diversity of food (and beer) can be
arranged for, but it's harder. But if this is on our list from the
start, it's definitely doable.
Generally, we should expect people to attend DebConf because of
DebConf, not because they want to see the city. There is a lot of
the latter going on too, but they can arrive early or stay longer…
also sprach Bernelle Verster <bernellev@gmail.com> [2014-09-02 17:58 +0200]:
> I don't mind going on a site visit. My one concern is that I will
> be seeing things without much of a clue, having never attended
> a debconf before.
>
> May I ask that we get a quick overview of the teammates, who's in
> the country, where they are and what they can do time wise?
> I don't want to take charge if it is not welcome! :)
> Alternatively, give the OK and list site requirements for me
> please.
I think it would be great to have a site visit, but it would be
really good to have more than one pair of eyes, and as you say,
maybe we can get some Debconf-experienced eyes too.
The reason is that the LocationChecklist is *way* too complex and
over the top for an initial venue scout, and it's really helpful to
have experienced people on site to avoid having to nitpick. Also,
it'll mean giving of a much more professional appearance to the
venue, which shall be beneficial later in the process of
negotiation.
Maybe an inofficial, uncoordinated/anonymous site visit is possible,
in which case taking *a lot* of pictures and/or a head-mounted video
camera with a running commentary would prove extremely useful to
people who cannot be on site. And it's not implausible to have
a video conference with the venue people at some point in time.
also sprach Stefano Rivera <stefanor@debian.org> [2014-09-03 10:32 +0200]:
> Yeah, it'd really help to have attended a DebConf. Of course there
> is now a good excuse for some people to go to DebConf 15 :P
You are *expected* to! ;)
> I'd imagine around 200 attendees. We'd want one talk room that can hold
> everyone.
I think 150 people would be fine, but do make sure to check local
fire restrictions.
> One other talk room, holding significantly less (say 50), and
> a couple of BoF rooms, maybe holding around 20 people.
I'd up the first number a slight bit, e.g. make the second room at
least half the size as the first. But BoF rooms for 20 are fine,
yes.
> > Another venue I have briefly looked at in the self-contained summercamp
> > vibe is the Crysalis Academy, but they seem too small -
> > http://chrysalisacademy.org.za/hiring-our-facilities/
>
> Interesting. They may not be too small, if there are other rooms not
> described. I see accommodation for 150, which is probably enough.
Out of my guts, I would say you should make sure that 250 people can
sleep in the vicinity of the venue.
> Bandwidth may be non-existent, of course. But I'd imagine that we
> could live with a wireless link, if absolutely necessary.
Define "wireless link" ;)
If you are talking LTE, then I doubt it. If you are talking
P2P/microwave, then yes.
But then again, having less bandwidth means more people
interactions! ;)
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft
: :' : proud Debian developer
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
"with sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. however, this is not
necessarily a good idea. it is hard to be sure where they are going
to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly
overhead."
-- rfc 1925
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)