Re: [Debconf-team] Final numbers
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Richard Darst <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> That would make that set of scripts need to look at logging schema,
> which would be quite a modification as it is. I can try to make a
> separate query to find these people and deal with them by some other
Right, I didn't mean that it had to be part of the same script.
Sending a separate mail on the topic would be actively better than
having a couple more lines in the existing mail.
> I guess the options are:
> (a) fix it now, revert all people who took advantage of it
> (b) fix it now, do nothing about people who took advantage of it
> (c) fix it now, do nothing about people who took advantage of it, make
> an exception for DDs (since they were the only people who couldn't
> take advantage of it)
> (d) fix it now, make an exception for anyone who wants to register
> sponsored even if they didn't register before deadline.
> (either way, our exception agreed to at the meeting yesterday would
> stand separately from this.)
> I think (d) is too much, (a) is slightly less preferable for me than
> (b) or (c), but mainly because I don't want to have to both make more
> work and give bad news.
See my other mail in this thread. I'd also note that anyone in the
core DebConf target audience (so at the very minimum reading d-d-a
mail) would have known about the deadline; it'd only be 'bad news' to
people who don't read d-d-a mail or the website or our other
announcements. Even if we'd entirely forgotten to lock the
sponsorship fields, it would still be perfectly fair to enforce the
deadline. I don't have time to dig out details, but already in the
past I remember us needing to check 'who had this status on the
relevant date' to get an accurate list.