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

Re: Requesting approval for Debian Cryptsetup Sprint

On Tue, 22 May 2018 at 22:27:59 +0100, Chris Lamb  wrote:
>> Jonas Meuer (mejo) and myself are planing to meet in Frankfurt on June
>> 16-17 for a cryptsetup sprint.
> […]
>> I don't need sponsorship for accommodation, and as Jonas doesn't need
>> sponsorship at all, the 450€ is the total budget for our sprint.
> Approved. Please go ahead and book tickets ASAP.

Thanks again for approving!  We got quite a bit done, among which


are the probably the most visible (we also have a few feature branches
that are not merged yet).  Kudos to the FTP masters for accepting our
first upload (which landed in the NEW queue) after a mere 2h!  Having
2:2.0.3-2 in unstable before the end of the week-end was beyond our
expectation :-)

I have a question regarding the reimbursement process from ffis e.V.
[0].  It reads “mail it (as in paper-mail, not e-mail) to the address
mentioned in the form, including original paper receipts” but… my
receipts and boarding passes exist only in digital format at the moment,
should I just print them and snail mail them along with the signed form?
> However, I was wondering if it would make more sense to invite/include
> some more people here. Not necessarily cryptsetup folks but people in
> the same "init" space...? Or the kernel? Or perhaps just other Debian
> folks in the area!

Jonas contacted some Debian folks in the Frankfurt area and we had
dinner and drinks with jfs one evening :-)  While we would love to see
the cryptsetup packaging team grow, we both felt the sprint would not
have been an ideal time for on-boarding as we had a pretty packed agenda
already, with pretty much only items requiring some familiarity with the

> Regardless, please blog about the sprint afterwards on Planet Debian.

After 2 days of rest we're now working on the blogpost. :-)


[0] https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/DPL/Reimbursement#ffis_e.V.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: