also sprach Margarita Manterola <margamanterola@gmail.com> [2014-12-09 20:17 +0100]:
> Instead, I'd rather have only one (the decision meeting), and have
> all the other conversation be done over the mailing list in
> advance.
Regardless of whether we have a decision meeting or not — this
should really be up to the committee to define — I think it would be
beneficial if we reserved a time slot *now*, and I suggest that it'd
be 29 January, maybe 1930 UTC. We can easily cancel this meeting if
it's not needed and we have time to find an alternative if one of
the main stakeholders is already booked then.
I fear that using dudle closer to the time is going to expose more
conflicts and inevitably make the job of whoever makes the decision
harder when they see who they are going to exclude with whatever
date/time they choose.
Unless there are objections, I'd like someone from the coordination
team to please make this suggestion official.
Meanwhile, we should be discussing the bids! Judging from the volume
of questions asked on the list so far (my lack of questions
included), both of them must be perfect! ;)
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf15: Heidelberg, Germany: http://debconf15.debconf.org
DebConf16 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)