Re: [Debconf-team] reading thru the meeting logs...
micah anderson <micah@riseup.net> writes:
> I want to emphasis a bit what Moray wrote above. If travel sponsorship
> is eliminated because other things are too expensive, that results in a
> Debconf where only people who can afford to go can go. It raises the
> economic minimum bar to a level where we cut people off from attending
> and that results in a completely different Debconf than we have ever had
> before. This shouldn't be something that is just waved away so
> trivially.
In my experience, travel sponsorship has been conditional on having
funds available for the rest of debconf. So in practice, saying that we
budget 0 for travel sponsorship until the rest of debconf is funded is
is not that radical a change.
Of course, there are unfortunate side effects of waiting until the last
minute to confirm offers of travel sponsorship, but I think confirming
budget for travel sponsorship 5 months before debconf (as ana proposes
in a different thread) would actually be a big improvement over the
(recent) past.
d
Reply to: