On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 05:50:21PM +0200, Amaya wrote: > Good step, imho, but laking details. Yeah, once a delegation is made, it's up to the delegates to work out what actually happens. > Anthony Towns wrote: > > Andreas Schuldei (stockholm -- overall organisation) ...so those areas are just things I know the individuals are already familiar with, not necessarily what they'll consider most important. I'm trusting that they'll have a much better idea than I do who's involved and knowledgable about debconf, and make sure that their concerns are met too. > Video team is here? Video team isn't anywhere, since Holger's the obvious candidate, but isn't yet a DD so can't be a delegate. But Andreas and Joerg have already indicated they value his opinion (by suggesting he be involved), so I'm pretty confident that'll be taken into account. > > Joerg Jaspert (Ganneff -- networking) > I think this category should be broader and include all the technical > requirements of debconf, networking being just a subset. The idea I was getting at here was that "being able to hack on stuff" is a pretty crucial component of a successful debconf; just like "somewhere to sleep" is, or "some interesting talks". > > Bdale Garbee (bdale -- external perspective) > Sponsors under this category? Press releases? What is exactly this? One thing I like to keep in mind is that it's easy to get so involved in something that you end up with a completely different perspective to the people you're building it for; I know everyone involved in debconf tends to live and breathe it for months on end, so I like to have someone involved who definitely won't get lost in the details simply because they don't *know* the details. I don't actually think there's any chance of that being a problem here, but I'd rather keep in the habit of having the check around when it's not a problem, than accidently miss out on it when it would've been useful. Having a representitive from (aiui) DebConf's largest ongoing sponsor formally involved in some of the decision making at an early point seems an interesting experiment to at least try once, too. > Being able to categorize every task in Debconf under one responisble > person would help stablish procedures and so on. It's one way to go; exactly how things actually get divided up is something the delegates and the orga team in general will need to decide; and could well be something that changes year to year depending on how the local team works best anyway. Cheers, aj
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature