On 03/10/19 3:03 am, Sam Hartman wrote: > Tl;DR: I think that the Mini-DebConf and Sprint process are working > great and have no plans to revisit those procedures. > But we can discuss whether we need to do that. > >>>>>> "Didier" == Didier 'OdyX' Raboud <odyx@debian.org> writes: > >> TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of > >> batching together travel reimbursement requests. > > Didier> Yes, but… I think we, as a project, need to be clear about > Didier> what this means, along at least three axes. > > Didier> First: what types of events qualify for travel > Didier> reimbursement? You have mentioned BSPs, but would a > Didier> miniDebConf also qualify? Of course, it is the expectation > Didier> that miniDebConf attendees attend to "enhance Debian"; but > Didier> also that they might present, or attend talks, > Didier> presentations, etc; during which they are not (should not > Didier> be) hunting bugs. I think such micro- conferences, although > Didier> not explicitly Bug Squashing Parties, should also benefit. > > I hope are developers are never funding bugs. We have enough without > paying for more:-) > > Seriously, I think it is well established that (mini) DebConfs are > available for travel reimbursements. I think the procedures for > mini-DebConfs and sprints are reasonably well understood and working > well, so I wasn't planning on revisiting them at this time. > > Didier> Second: from which account is the money taken? The answer > Didier> might seem obvious, but let's make sure we're on the same > Didier> line of thought. When organizing a BSP (or a miniDebConf), > Didier> it is of good measure to try find sponsors and supporters to > Didier> help lower the cost for attendees. In plenty of cases, for a > Didier> multi-day event, one needs a venue, help cover food and > Didier> accomodation costs, etc. But these events rarely last for > Didier> more than a couple of days; so adding significant charges to > Didier> support travel makes the funding a larger challenge. So the > Didier> only realistic money source seems to be external; hence > Didier> "Debian" money, not "event" money. (The annual DebConf is > Didier> different in terms of scale and duration, which reduces > Didier> travel support in proportion to the other charges of the > Didier> budget.) > > I'd assume we'd use our normal policies for deciding what accounts to > use. > In terms of how much a mini-DebConf or sprint contributes, generally > they propose a budget to the DPL. > Some of the mini-DebConfs tend to have some sponsors and tend to produce > neutral budgets, but that is not a requirement. > > Didier> Third: what rules-of-thumb, or guidelines do we want for > Didier> travel support? In the context of relatively _short_ events > Didier> (2-5 days), I think we ought to put upper limits in term of > Didier> amounts, and in terms of distance. Put differently: set > Didier> economical and ecological limits. In this day and age, I > Didier> don't think Debian should be supporting flying long > Didier> distances for short events [2]. So we could have a > Didier> duration-to-distance, or similar, criteria, as well as > > I think factoring these concerns in is important to do. > But there are a number of other factors that also matter. > > * If a sprint is happening, we need to sponsor the right people to > attend that sprint, and sometimes that involves long-distance travel. > > * People in Europe and to a lesser extent North America are > geographically privileged in Debian in some significant ways. We > might well choose to spend money to help balance that out some. > > I strongly believe that Debian should be about free software. Every > time we mix in some other issue, we reduce our contributor base and > dilute our mission. For that reason I'm not in favor of Debian making > environmental preferences like preferring more expensive train travel > over cheaper flights. I don't have a problem with individual events > making such choices. > >From personal experience I note that trains are a lot less accessible to > people who are blind (and quite possibly a number of other disabilities > in some areas of the world) than planes. > > You can say that you'd make exceptions for disabilities. > But asking people to declare their disability and judging them like that > makes us second class citizens. I don't trust many of the people in > Debian who might be making those decisions to treat me with compassion > and so I'd be more likely to just not go to the event than to go through > the exercise of proving myself and my needs to someone who has limited > understanding of the cost to me of what they are understanding. > > > > > > Didier> Without common rules-of-thumb, you, as DPL, would be > Didier> de-facto delegating the setting of travel support policies > Didier> to events; with potentially large differences in how we > Didier> address the requests, and I'd regret this. > > I think it is OK for different events to have different policies. > We have that today. I am not going to spend my time trying to > facilitate reconciling that. > > Didier> So what I'd would enjoy to see is exchanges along the lines > Didier> of: > > Didier> - BSP Orga: hey DPL; we organize a 3-days/2-nights BSP and > Didier> would like to support travel for potential attendees. We > Didier> expect about 12 travel requests; what can you do for us? - > > I'd much rather event organizers come with a rough budget. > As DPL I certainly don't have time or desire to put together a budget > for someone. > I don't think the treasurer team is up to guaranteeing that task for > everyone. For so many reasons I'd rather not say here, I'd give a huge +1 to Sam. Thank you, Sam. Best, Utkarsh
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature