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

1 year deadline for reimbursements

  Martin Michlmayr is doing a very good job at reviewing past sprint
expenses, reimbursement, etc. Discussing with him, we ended up talking
about reimbursements that have been pledged before sprints but not
requested after them.

Not everybody requests reimbursements right after the sprint, but
usually participants do that in a few months. Still, there are
exceptions, and I've witnessed in the past people asking reimbursements
after more than 1 year of a specific event.

That is a PITA for various reasons. The most important is that it adds
uncertainty to the amount of money Debian has available. This is
completely tolerable when only a few people do that, but it'd be
unbearable if everyone start doing that. Another reason is that it makes
more difficult to track reimbursement approvals, e.g. across DPL

Bottom line: both myself and the auditors think the practice of delaying
"too much" reimbursement requests after the corresponding event should
be discouraged. As a result, I've just added the following note at
http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DPL/Reimbursement :

> Finally, you should request your reimbursements in a timely manner: late
> coming reimbursement requests are a PITA and make it hard to estimate
> available monetary resources. As a general rule, no reimbursement
> requests will be processed if requested more than 1 year after the
> corresponding event (sprint, purchase, etc).

It is not carved in stone, and we can make exceptions if very good
reasons to do so arise. But it is still meant to discourage waiting "too
long" before requesting reimbursements, most notably after sprints.

Stefano Zacchiroli     zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} . o .
Maître de conférences   ......   http://upsilon.cc/zack   ......   . . o
Debian Project Leader    .......   @zack on identi.ca   .......    o o o
« the first rule of tautology club is the first rule of tautology club »

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: