(Apparently the workshop.xhtml page has been removed from the site, that
doesn't help… )
Le dimanche, 19 juillet 2015, 18.34:13 Martín Ferrari a écrit :
> On 17/07/15 17:20, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote:
> > * Martin and Michael are amongst those _making_ the DebConf happen:
> > I feel it is strictly better to encourage them to run this under the
> > DebConf umbrella, than to have them organize something else,
> > elsewhere, elsewhen.
>
> I don't think that being orga justifies this.
I'm saying that given that the workshop _will_ take place, it should't
come as a surprise that when its organizers are also "DebConf orga",
they pick a time+place at Deb{Conf,Camp}.
> > * The logistics _are_ in place, and this event will cover its own
> > costs (probably even make a benefit).
>
> Well, one think I don't like is that the cost structure has not been
> explained. We are being offered to accept this _as part of DebConf_
> without understanding anything, we don't even have a translation of
> the webpage.
Well. For one thing there's _trust_ to fellow DDs and DebConf Team
members, that should make us fall more to the "assume good faith" side,
rather than to the "that looks like an abuse" side.
(Slightly related: how we handle trust in the DebConf context is
problematic for a long time, and it's unfortunately not obvious that
we're becoming better.)
The cost structure has now been explained, no? So putting aside the
(admitted) communication problems, is this cost structure still a
problem to you?
> Can all orga members organise their own workshops and classes like
> this?
Yes, but there's no reason to limit this to orga: anyone should be
allowed to, within a certain framework. (This framework didn't exist
when the proposal first came to DebConf-Team.)
That's a procedural problem; I, for one, would welcome more of these
workshops, but they should probably be managed through (and in
collaboration with) the DebConf Team, rather than independently. That's
exactly the discussion we're having now, though.
> If it is not a differentiated perk, then why it is different from the
> rest of the events at DebConf, I don't see pictures of all the
> speakers prominently shown in places, it is not just another event in
> summit that was approved by the content team.
That's true, and somewhat unfortunate, arguably.
I do think though that we should be supportive of these initiatives, and
discuss ways around "regulating" them, rather than forbid them upfront.
> > * This is a good opportunity to bring more people to
> > Deb{Conf,Camp,ian}, also probably from /unusual/ domains. I don't
> > see how this could end up wrongly.
>
> We are already overbooked, I don't think we need/want more people.
Are we really overbooked during the (initially planned) workshop times?
I think we should allow this experiment to run, and draw our conclusions
after it took place: other than the procedural shortcut (although
arguably annoying), is it still _concretely_ a problem?
Cheers,
OdyXAttachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.