[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [Debconf-team] DebConf8 Location Decision Meeting



Hi,

On Monday 29 January 2007 23:36, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> The idea is to try to evaluate the options and arrive to a consensus
> of which of these two locations is better suited for hosting DebConf8.
> For this, we should have a meeting similar to that which led to the
> decision of DebConf7.
>
> This means, first point out the weaknesses and strengths of each
> venue, then allow for some questions, if there's anything still
> missing from the info pages, then compare the venues against this
> Priority List: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/PriorityList

To summarize for those who have not been at the debconf7 decision:

In the beginning each venue describes each topic from the priority list for 
their venue.

Then each venue describe what are the good points about the other venue.

Then each venue describes the weak point in the own venue.

Then, we will go thru the priorities and say "1, 3, 5,6 and 9 are equal for 
both venues, on 7 and 8 $venue_a is better and on 2 and 4 $venue_b, so we 
take $venue_a"

(disclaimer: I haven't looked up neither the priorities nor the venue in 
detail - so this is completly made up :)

We should try to find consensus on this discussion by everyone in the channel 
_and_ has voice set (the irc mode is set so that only people with voice are 
allowed to talked, everyone can join and listen - we'll have another channel 
for everyone to talk)  - so we need to come up with a criteria, who can be on 
this channel, too. An easy guess would be everybody on 
http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf7/Teams plus a few others (which we 
should list there for future reference), plus two people from each venue. And 
only those will find a (sometimes only rough) consensus on each priority and 
how the venues rank and in the end we'll have a winner, as we have 9 
priorities. 

And of course this might also not happen at this meeting, a.) as anything can 
go different than planned and b.) even with 9 priorities we can have a tie.

And I probably forgot (or mixed up) some details, please add them.

And we should put parts of this procedure in the agenda on  
http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf7/Meetings - please do so :) Right now 
I'm too tired to do so. 


regards,
	Holger

Attachment: pgpaf18yLGFO1.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: