Re: [Debconf-team] non-CHF sponsorship
On 20/11/12 02:57, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Montag, 19. November 2012, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>> On 19/11/12 23:23, Andrew McMillan wrote:
>>> In my experience[1] with this it's almost impossible to be
>>> prescriptive about this with sponsors in this manner, and therefore
>>> (a) and (d) are complete non-starters.
>>
>> I notice both yourself and Brian didn't mention (b) at all
>
> right, thats why Andrew wrote:
>
>>> Option (b) is what effectively *does* happen, in that the
>>> conference happens, everyone tries to make a budget that has a
>>> small surplus, and over the many years of Debconfs sometimes SPI
>>> (or equivalent) has had to fund the shortfall and sometimes they
>>> have received the benefit of a small surplus.
>
> Please read this whole paragraph again...!
>
Andrew also wrote "and you're stuck with (c).", and Brian didn't mention (b)
>
> cheers,
> Holger
>
> [btw, contract myth]
>> (e.g. they want a contract signed yesterday, and
>> after it is signed, they won't move)
>
> that's just FUD. (And noise, which is distracting from the tasks at hand.)
Weren't you just on IRC last week saying that they "need something back
from us" before their general meeting last Wednesday?
"as long as we spend 160k"...."and we wont spend less there": those are
your words Holger, so please don't accuse me of FUD
You also mention below that if we are broke, he will be flexible on the
kiosk thing: but just what does that mean in numbers? If that is the
only flexibility, then my comments are not FUD at all.
If the sponsors want to pay USD and EUR, why not add option (e) to my
list: insist that Le Camp accepts some of the contract in USD and EUR?
Foreign companies in Switzerland are already paying their employees in
EUR because of the exchange rate uncertainty. Why should Debian or SPI
be stuck in the middle?
http://www.englishforum.ch/swiss-politics-news/121486-ok-then-we-ll-pay-you-euro.html
------ From IRC: -------
<h01ger> so, had a nice phonecall with mr pianaro but i'm as smart as
before (as the german saying goes...) - mostly because when i read the
contract before (in english+french) i didnt really find much concrete
stuff i consider worth changing
the contract is mostly just an offer, as long as we spend 160k
<h01ger> and we wont spend less there, unless we cut debconf by half (in
people, not time) or such, which we dont want
so the best/most sensible addition i see is a paragraph stating that
"we will work together" or such
which is think is good enough, though obvisouly not legally binding
(and "btw" he also said if we are really broke, he could+would go down
with eg le camps profit on the kiosk thing. (thus reconfirming my view,
that he is willing to help debconf and make it a success, and not sue us.)
but he also told me what cane said, that they'll have a board meeting
tomorrow and he would really really like/need something back from us. he
understands that we cannot give him a signed contract by tomorrow, but
he would like to have an informal "yes we'll come" at least/indead.
Reply to: