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

Re: [Debconf-discuss] Insider manipulation of DC13 site selection, and apparent coverup

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:54:05AM +0000, Ian Jackson wrote:
> However, that DC13 team member did tell me that the DPL was fully
> informed, with all the details, before the DPL approved the DC13
> budget.

Please name names or facts to support this or, alternatively, drop it.

- My budget approval mail (subject to conditions) [1] is dated November
  26th. Before that, I've tried to stay as far away as possible from
  DebConf13 organization, pretty much as I've done in the past 3 years
  as DPL for previous DebConf. Not because I'm mean, but simply because
  I've no spare energies to devote to DebConf organization and I've
  always trusted the DebConf Team to do a good job at that. My
  activities in DebConf organization has basically remained at the level
  of answering, as DPL, to the question I got asked from the team, on
  mostly budget-related manners.

  My main involvement in DebConf organization ever has mostly been at a
  process level, to strengthen the formal relationship between DebConf
  organization and Debian as a Project (see the DebConf11 BoF, the
  chairs delegations, and my various 'bits from the DPL' entries on this
  matter over the years).

- As I recall, the first time I've heard about this "anonymous donation"
  is from your mail to -project [2], that is dated November 30th, 4 days
  later than [1].

- Later on, on December 2nd according to my IRC logs, a DebConf team
  member insisted, on the basis of "I think you should know it", to give
  me some background about that "anonymous donation" --- that is 6 days
  later than [1]. So, I do *now* know more about this matter, but I
  didn't at the time of the budget approval.

Now, even if I've never considered "long term memory" to be one of my
strong suites, I do suspect your source is wrong --- at least on this

[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.debian.conference.team/8996 
[2]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/11/msg00027.html


I think the above clarification was in order, because you were asserting
(based on sources that are unknown to me) something about myself which
AFAICT is not true.

On the more general matter, that you are clearly still very much
interested in, you probably have noticed that I didn't change my mind
(i.e. un-approve the budget) based on what I've been told on December
2nd. This is because I'm in stark agreement with the position that Russ
expressed on -project [3].  I agree with you that a donation coming from
a DebConf team member with strings attached to a venue would have been
unappropriate. And that is the conclusion that has been reached by the
"team" (quotes because it's not clear to me how the sponsorship sub-team
is structured or works). That was indeed the expected outcome, I'm happy
it's been achieved --- well in advance wrt budget approval and before my
knowledge about all this issue --- and I found no further reasons to

[3]: https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2012/12/msg00034.html

Stefano Zacchiroli . . . . . . .  zack@upsilon.cc . . . . o . . . o . o
Maître de conférences . . . . . http://upsilon.cc/zack . . . o . . . o o
Debian Project Leader . . . . . . @zack on identi.ca . . o o o . . . o .
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: