Re: [Debconf-team] DebConf11 surplus for DebConf 12
On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 11:36:16PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 04:16:11PM -0400, Richard Darst wrote:
> > These two messages describe our current monetary status:
> > http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20120612.164231.5dab56bb.en.html
> > http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20120612.183811.fb6f6511.en.html
>
> If I'm reading them correctly, the (still hypothetical) government
> support will balance the estimated needs of accommodation and travel
> sponsorship. That is encouraging.
Yes, for the most part, within our ability to guess things right now.
> > We would like to be able to count on the DC11 surplus (around 25k$)
> > for DC12. This will allow us to immediately send out travel
> > sponsorship confirmations. It will also mean that the Debian bank
> > (money from general Debian funds, as opposed to surplus) won't need to
> > be used.
> >
> > Thus, I am requesting use of the (entire) DC11 surplus. It is very
> > unlike we'll actually have to use the whole thing - and if/when
> > government support comes through, perhaps not any.
>
> Go for it then.
> And also go get government support :-), which we clearly need!
Thanks.
> ----
>
> FWIW, and marginally getting back to the topic of pre-approved early
> tentative budgets, I would have considered perfectly appropriate for
> such a budget to include the surplus coming from past year. That is
> coherent with the view that DebConf-s should strive to have _amortized_
> zero cost. So this is maybe an example where implementing past plans
> could have reduced money stress a little bit, which is a worthwhile goal
> that I think we should try next year. I agree with you that early
> budgets will be neither complete nor 100% correct. But they are better
> than nothing and help in making decisions, as this thread shows.
It is the understanding of some people that each year, the extra money
should be given to Debian, and to use it for N+1 we need to ask each
time. So I think asking just now was trying to go along with the
plan. I don't mind either way, I just account for it properly.
Another random thing: According to "the plan", we should send the DC11
surplus back to debian:
- For SPI, this is a no-op since there is no separate accounting.
- For FFIS, would you rather the extra money be transferred to the
Debian earmark according to the plan (and then we might ask for some
back, and then transfer the surplus back after DC12), or to DC12
directly? I haven't figured out about how many Euros DC12 will need,
so I can't suggest a smaller amount to pass to DC12 yet.
- Richard
--
| Richard Darst - rkd@ - boltzmann: up 1057 days, 19:43
| http://rkd.zgib.net - pgp 0xBD356740
| "Ye shall know the truth and -- the truth shall make you free"
Reply to: