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

Re: [Debconf-team] A proposal about scheduling for DC14

I won't argue more on this, as it will start becoming a flamewar if we
don't control ourselves ;-) Whether or not we are having a DebCamp
should already be decided, and we should work based on that. So I
won't fan the bug/regression flames anymore. And please, I invite the
others to do likewise.

> The only issue I've seen that might be a problem is the suggestion that
> the video team may not be able to cope with 3 talk streams going on. It
> would be good if someone could confirm that's not a problem, but in the
> absence of yelling I'm going to assume that this is doable.

Please wait for a formal answer from them, it will be much clearer. I
have just requested Carl to comment.

> So I think this rough format is what we should try for DC 14. It's not
> going to keep everyone happy, but takes on board a range of
> considerations that have been mentioned. I've emailed the venue to try
> and get some meal times nailed down and will follow up when I've done
> so.

OK. But, even after your explanation, and the others' input: I feel
the proposed format effectively cuts the conference to three days,
reinstating a three day long soft-DebCamp (with very few BoF slots
around). During DebConf, we usually carry a wholly-packed schedule for
the full length of the conference (five/six days). Cutting it back to
only three days of talks, with 3:1 concurrency... Does not feel very
nice to me. I would prefer having a full two-room schedule, with a
potentially empty room for scheduling ad-hoc BoF sessions. And people
that want to devote time to hacking can, of course, take advantage of
the "sprints" feature.

I understand the rationale for pushing this change. But, on pushing it
while back-pedaling? :(

Reply to: