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

Re: [Debconf-team] DebConf13 venue decision meeting



Hi there!

On Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:01:01 +0100, Moray Allan wrote:
> If the list is working again, we should try to agree a time for the
> DebConf13 venue decision meeting.  An online poll would be best, but
> before a volunteer sets that up, it would make sense to agree some
> possible date range.  Do the bid teams just want "as soon as
> possible", or is there e.g. a strong preference for or against holding
> it on a weekend?

Just before FOSDEM I got a call from Mr. Pianaro (`Le Camp` director,
Bcc:ed) who wanted to know the status of our bid, for the very simple
reason that he is now taking reservations and other companies are
interested as well.  Please remember that `Le Camp` is managed by a YMCA
foundation and thus it has to cover as much as possible the maintenance
expenses.  We the Swiss team were well aware of the decision schedule
and we always reported mid-February as the more reasonable date for the
decision to Mr. Pianaro, so I found his call completely fair.

I am sorry for not having informed both the DebConf and Swiss teams
before, but RL and FOSDEM took more time than planned during the last
days (and I am not yet back to Geneva where I will have another
conference in the next days [1], FWIW also presenting our bid [2]).

[1] <http://www.debian.org/events/2012/0207-opensourcenow>
[2] <http://opensourcenow.net/conf%C3%A9rences>

Because of this reason, I would say that "as soon as possible" would be
the best preference IMHO.  If this means having it on weekends, then let
us do that.

> Speaking for myself: I'm flexible about dates/times, but I would
> suggest holding the meeting at least 6 days after the approaching
> DebConf12 global team meeting.

Which, according to [3], means not before February 15th.

[3] <http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20120205.165020.dd120cbf.en.html>

Thx, bye,
Gismo / Luca

Attachment: pgpclzl46ciWE.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: