also sprach Gunnar Wolf <gwolf@gwolf.org> [2016-02-05 05:43 +1100]:
> Video recording should also be included, it has been marked as an
> important thing by several people. I'd go for recording
> everything, but that's just me ;-)
By this you mean the "okay with being recorded" checkbox?
We are working on a solution to allow free-form data to be attached
to events, so that we can trivially add any additional field without
database migrations.
> Besides that, I agree with the simplification. Explicit URLs can
> be part of the description, duration can be part of the talk type
> (as also discussed later on the thread).
URLs are already supported.
> As for notes... If we have the field, we have to ensure to read
> and act upon it in a timely fashion!
I don't think we should introduce a new communication medium this
way. The two fields are intended
- for submitters to specify special requests, and maybe this field
should be turned read-only as soon as a submission is undergoing
consideration (i.e. CfP closes)
- for content team members, they can leave notes with events, e.g.
important considerations the next person handling an event
should keep in mind. This is more data storage than
communication.
> > Note that it was called "Description" (not "Abstract"), which
> > I find slightly more friendly
>
> Great.
Let's assume upstream wants to keep "Abstract". We do not want to
maintain a fork, not even for small things like this. Maybe we can
parametrise it, but again, I'd like to gauge how important this is.
I.e. is this a priority?
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debconf.org> @martinkrafft
: :' : DebConf orga team
`. `'`
`- DebConf16: Cape Town: https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf16
DebConf17 in your country? https://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf17
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)