On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 08:53:03PM +0200, Ana Guerrero Lopez wrote: > > So no, I don't intend to participate in any plan that involves separating > > the teams by year to have separate conversations. It's hard enough to > > improve the institutional continuity of DebConf year over year due to the > > nature of the work and the burnout factor; we don't need to make it worse by > > quarantining the teams for such an important discussion topic. > I feel like we're discussing two totally different issues here O_o > If you're against the chairs talking with people grouping them by debconf > year or global team, suggest something else. I understond that the goal > here is taking the time to hear what everybody has to say about the > problems and possible solutions. I am supportive of Martin's original suggestion to have a team-wide discussion at DebConf, and I don't understand why there were any objections to this. I *do* understand not having it taking up an official track slot in a video taped room, but the push-back against having such a session /at all/ makes no sense to me. It would be a shame to miss out on this opportunity to speak face-to-face, which only comes once a year. Yes, the team has operational responsibilities during DebConf which also get in the way, but there are also operational responsibilities (or other off-line responsibilities) that get in the way all the rest of the year too. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature