Neil McGovern dijo [Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 03:42:14PM +0000]: > On the specific case, I remember when I wound up the accounts for > DebConf 7 that the surplus was earmarked as a donation to DebConf 8. > More specifically, there was a Debian seed fund of 10k USD to help with > the cash flow and then 8k GBP which was transferred to Argentina. > This then continued with 18k USD being sent to Spain, 53k EUR to New > York, and then 19k USD to Bosnia and Herzegovina. > > However, although I think that it's Debian's money, not DebConf's money, > we need to remember what the sponsorship was donated for. We should also > be clear about what may be expected to be a structural deficit, and what > is a cash-flow problem. > > In general, I think that excess should be returned to Debian as the > holding organisation, but that Debian should be willing to help ensure > that sub-projects can draw on Debianfunds if needed, and it is sensible > to do so. On this specific issue: Up until DebConf10, DebConf was *not* officially part of Debian; in DC10 we held a BoF where it was decided DebConf would become what it is now, one of Debian's projects, having our assets managed by Debian (and the trusted organizations), and the national organizations (that are needed for obvious reasons) are approved every year if needed. That's the main reason why we never had any official Debian delegation until 2010, and why we have one since 2011. The DebConf organization team didn't use Debian funds before then, but now the chairs are authorized to use Debian funds to pursue the annual Debian conference. Of course, the overall budget is sent to the DPL for approval. And, yes, this might not be the best ever possible scheme of work - It is just the current one :)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature