Started logging meeting in #debconf-team, times are UTC.
[20:00:49] * marga is here.
[20:00:55] * Sledge waves
[20:01:17] * Tincho to
[20:01:18] <Tincho> o
[20:01:29] * h01ger = Holger Levsen
[20:02:24] <h01ger> meetbot doesnt reply anymore. neither in channel nor via msg. but you can see the notes and topics online at instantly (reload)
[20:02:24] <Ganneff> marga: you do minutes?
[20:02:29] <marga> Ganneff: yep.
[20:02:35] <Ganneff> h01ger: it does, see query.
[20:02:39] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 1. DebCamp: how open/closed should it be?
[20:02:42] <Ganneff> marga: thanks.
[20:02:42] * broonie waves
[20:02:56] * ASCIIGirl waves
[20:03:09] <h01ger> Ganneff, right. from 300 down to 3 lines. will fix that too, later :)
[20:03:25] <Ganneff> now, we have top 1. how open/closed do we want debcamp?
[20:03:43] <Ganneff> closed enough to not be holidays for someone, but a working camp for everyone who wants it.
[20:03:48] <Ganneff> imo
[20:03:51] <marga> Yes, I agree.
[20:03:59] * mhy nods
[20:04:03] <Ganneff> we should make that clear from the beginning (and will, i think).
[20:04:14] <Ganneff> of course its hard to limit it, if people pay on their own.
[20:04:15] <marga> But the thing is, how do we prevent it from becoming a holiday, or what do we do with people that come to party?
[20:04:21] <moray> Definitely Debian paying for holidays is silly, and I think even non-paying people can distract others
[20:04:24] <Ganneff> but then we should make the "noisy/silent" hacklab available.
[20:04:34] <moray> s/non-paying/self-paying/
[20:04:39] <Ganneff> we should reserve the right to throw people out of hacklöabs if they disturb
[20:04:44] <Ganneff> and do party.
[20:04:49] <Ganneff> and actually use the right.
[20:05:04] <Tincho> we can't prevent people for having some fun, either
[20:05:09] <Ganneff> of course work meetings can be loud(er), so rooms for that need to be there.
[20:05:22] <marga> ok
[20:05:23] <moray> Tincho: people working and having fun is best...
[20:05:24] <Ganneff> sure not, but there is difference between fun and just annoying everyone who wants to work
[20:05:38] <moray> Ganneff: well, meetings are really more important than 'quiet' work, people can do quiet work at home anyway...
[20:05:56] <marga> So, the quiet hacklab should be smaller.
[20:05:57] <Ganneff> moray: one silent hacklab and one "loud" seems to be good for that.
[20:06:05] <Ganneff> you can hack and code, but also have place to discuss all stuff.
[20:06:12] <moray> sure -- though my point is loud != party, I suppose
[20:06:19] <Ganneff> while still not having party in the loud one.
[20:06:19] <beuno> was this a real problem in dc7? people disturbing? (I don't recall it was)
[20:06:25] <Ganneff> but an atmosphrere one can work in
[20:06:34] <marga> beuno: some people complained.
[20:06:44] <Ganneff> beuno: some people say so. i dont know, i was in admin room, it was always loud there, thanks to the servers :)
[20:06:46] <marga> beuno: and... well... the Argentinian group was particularly loud.
[20:07:07] * h01ger doesnt really understand this discussion. first, we always stressed that debcamp is for work. (and we should continue to do this and its good to be reminded of this). second, also working people will party anyway (the moment friends arrive, the network hangs, jetlag kicks in). a possible solution/enhancement is to provide separated work areas and set up a sign "please be quiet" ;-)
[20:07:14] <Ganneff> ok. i think we basically all agree on this?
[20:07:31] <Ganneff> h01ger: this is what we just discussed :)
[20:07:51] <marga> What we don't know is how to make things better than dc7 or dc6
[20:07:51] <Ganneff> anything else on this?
[20:08:05] * h01ger was in between meeting and eating pizza until 2min ago. no time to read backlog. but hey, great we agree ;-)
[20:08:32] <moray> marga: no -- we *did* discuss the issue before them too -- though I think as discussed on irc/the list some things can be done at the time to encourage people to join projects etc.
[20:08:33] <Ganneff> marga: we can try enforcing the "its a working camp" point much more. and then do that splitted hacklab scenario.
[20:08:58] <Tincho> also, the ideas for encouraging work are good too
[20:09:06] <Tincho> I think enrico proposed that
[20:09:13] <beuno> I think just trying to create a better work atmosphere should sufice (like setting specific topics to work on)
[20:09:27] <marga> ok. So, I guess we agree.
[20:09:34] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 2a. Hotel Status
[20:09:37] <Ganneff> marga: your floor
[20:10:16] <ana> ag, late for the meeting :/
[20:10:33] <marga> Ok. So... Being that I've uphold to not hide problems, I must tell you, that we have a problem :-\
[20:10:39] <sgran> \o/
[20:10:48] <sgran> business as usual, then :P
[20:10:53] <Ganneff> #agreed We try to enforce the "Its a work camp" idea more for DebCamp and want to have splitted (silent(noisy) hacklabs
[20:11:12] <Ganneff> marga: uh. what?
[20:11:13] <h01ger> marga, \o/
[20:11:13] <marga> I just spoke with the hotel. There was a misunderstanding do to the fact that the girl with whom we talked quit. And there's a booking during the 7, 8 and 9.
[20:11:24] <marga> s/do/due
[20:11:33] <h01ger> :/
[20:11:36] <Sledge> :-(
[20:11:41] <marga> This booking takes some of the conference rooms, not all.
[20:11:41] <Ganneff> brr.
[20:11:53] <marga> The hotel has 7 conference rooms. The booking is currently for 4 of them.
[20:12:00] <Ganneff> thats debcamp time?
[20:12:08] <marga> Although, obviously, the ones we wanted.
[20:12:09] <h01ger> there were supposed to be other guests anyway, right?
[20:12:22] <Ganneff> h01ger: yes, but not stealing our talk rooms :)
[20:12:25] <Tincho> last 2/3 days of debcamp
[20:12:26] <h01ger> obviously. :/
[20:12:29] <marga> h01ger: not that many. Most of the attendees are going to stay somewhere else.
[20:12:58] <Ganneff> marga: are the other 3 rooms usable for us as hacklabs?
[20:12:59] <beuno> marga, las 2/3 days is pretty bad, the final days to get everything setup
[20:13:09] <Ganneff> and when can we get in the others for setup stff?
[20:13:14] <Ganneff> like network, video team and so on
[20:13:16] <marga> The hotel people are now going to try and negotiate with the other conf, to see if we can find something that is good for both of us.
[20:13:22] <h01ger> ok, only debcamp... we planned to have these rooms as work rooms? so lets party instead! SCNR ;-)
[20:13:26] <Ganneff> .oO(they move!) :)
[20:13:58] <Ganneff> marga: did they set a time until when you hear back from them?
[20:14:02] <h01ger> it would be more than great to have those rooms which should become talk rooms at least 3 days in advance. better 7
[20:14:11] <marga> The worst that can happen is that we have to stick to the conf rooms without wifi, that only have access from the outside.
[20:14:32] <marga> Ganneff: I'm calling tomorrow, and the day after, and the day after, until they fix it.
[20:14:36] <beuno> h01ger, I suppose the plan was to get them setup for networking and all that, having people *in* them won't let us leave equipment around
[20:14:45] <Ganneff> if we can get wires in there we can live with the rooms, *for debcamp*.
[20:14:52] <h01ger> beuno, right. that was suboptimal in EDI...
[20:14:53] <Sledge> yup
[20:15:00] <ana> marga: are those conferences bigger that ours?
[20:15:13] <Ganneff> but it would be best if those could move into the other rooms. how are they size-wise? larger/smaller?
[20:15:15] <marga> ana: it's a big conf, but most of the attendees stay somewhere else.
[20:15:34] <Ganneff> ... they come from somewhere else, they should use the rooms with the access from outside. :)
[20:15:36] <marga> Ganneff: which ones? You lost me?
[20:15:41] <ana> marga: and i guess no really posibility to move to another hotel..
[20:15:41] <marga> Ganneff: indeed!
[20:15:56] <Ganneff> marga: how big are those rooms we dont want but maybe have to use?
[20:16:07] <marga> Ganneff: big enough.
[20:16:15] <Ganneff> for us or for them?
[20:16:32] <marga> Ganneff: size is not so much the issue. The fact that you have to come in from the outside is more the issue.
[20:16:50] <Ganneff> now. we cant do much currently, so i propose to move it to mail, marga mailing -team as soon as she has more info. which is hopefully soon (damn hotel). ok?
[20:16:58] <Ganneff> marga: makes networking "fun"
[20:17:19] <marga> Ganneff: sure.
[20:17:24] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 2b. Hotel status - Infrastructure (wireless, wired, uplink)
[20:17:38] * h01ger hopes the "access for outsiders from the outside" argument will convince the hotel
[20:17:39] <maxyz> Ganneff: 220m^2 and 350m^2. Big enough. :)
[20:17:41] <Ganneff> #action marga will get back with more info about the hotel problems
[20:17:50] <Ganneff> maxyz: ok.
[20:18:00] <Ganneff> so, next topic. infrastructure. who added it, who wants the floor?
[20:18:16] <sgran> I added it, although I really only have one question
[20:18:20] <beuno> marga, any updates with the internet setup in the hotel? Some guy from Mar del Plata said he had done a similar setup at some point?
[20:18:27] <sgran> any specifics yet?
[20:18:45] <Ganneff> thats for local team then. someone from them up with networking?
[20:18:45] <sgran> (it's not a big deal if the answer is no)
[20:19:06] <marga> beuno: we have a guy with contacts with Telefonica who is trying to get them to give us the fiber we want. It looks promising, but we still don't know for sure.
[20:19:32] * ana .oO(timofonica)
[20:19:36] <sgran> marga: what sort of uplink are we looking at now ?
[20:19:36] <Tincho> yeah
[20:19:54] <marga> sgran: well, we had the specifics, until this stupid mess with the conf rooms turned up. When we know the conf rooms for sure, then we can start planning the wiring.
[20:20:06] <Ganneff> ok. sgrans answer seems to be no, for now. probably best to leave until we know the situation with the talk rooms.
[20:20:08] <h01ger> btw, whats the localteam irc channel? i need to improve my spanish ;)
[20:20:12] <Ganneff> next ok, or somethign more to add?
[20:20:12] <sgran> sure
[20:20:23] <beuno> h01ger, we're using debian-ar atm
[20:20:33] <h01ger> beuno, gracias
[20:20:36] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 3. Pentabarf status
[20:20:39] <Ganneff> ok. thats my floor.
[20:20:46] <sgran> no, I have questions about internal wiring, but they can wait too
[20:20:50] <marga> sgran: we are hoping for fiber, as much bandwith as possible, but we haven't been granted it yet.
[20:20:56] <sgran> sure, no problem
[20:21:01] <Ganneff> status is: the 0.3.x release is running currently. not fully working, so blocked for everyone != admins.
[20:21:02] <sgran> I just want some idea when you know
[20:21:05] <sgran> but it's early yet
[20:21:07] <Ganneff> sgran: come back in AOB ok?
[20:21:14] <maxyz> sgran: For the wireless part, there are bunch of aps in the hotel. the idea si to add a few more, probably some openwrt compatible ones...
[20:21:31] <sgran> ok, good
[20:21:34] <marga> Ganneff: how much longer?
[20:21:37] <Ganneff> we need to convert a bit of info from the old pentabarf database to the new, before we will make it accessible again, but thats something mhy/sgran and myself will do this week.
[20:21:42] * h01ger can get APs from freifunk/openwrt
[20:21:45] <Ganneff> i want to have it ready at latest on sunday.
[20:22:11] <Ganneff> which includes already having entered all the details for the dc8 we need to collect papers.
[20:22:21] <marga> Ganneff: ok. I still owe you the info I want and the javascript constraints. Should I be sending that to you this week?
[20:22:29] <Ganneff> si.
[20:22:39] <marga> Ganneff: ok, I'll be preparing that after the meeting then.
[20:22:46] <Ganneff> i will grab Tincho during the week, to do the css for the new pentabarf conf pages.
[20:22:51] <moray> Ganneff: as you imply, the more info we can keep accessible from dc7 the better (both for users and for us to check info about last year)
[20:22:53] <Ganneff> then some tests and database data migration
[20:22:55] <Tincho> Ganneff: ok
[20:23:01] <Ganneff> then we can free up the access.
[20:23:12] <Ganneff> moray: we will keep the whole dc7 info available in pentabarf.
[20:23:23] <Tincho> can we decide dates for papers and registration already?
[20:23:26] <Ganneff> people can reuse their accounts and simply need to "subscribe" to dc8
[20:23:33] <Ganneff> Tincho: slow, next topic.
[20:23:37] <Tincho> ok :)
[20:23:42] * h01ger notes that pentabarf again needs "video extensions" and that des will work on it.
[20:23:54] <Ganneff> h01ger: des has access to the pentabarf host directly
[20:23:58] <Ganneff> so he can lkook there
[20:24:08] * beuno notes that pentabarf should have an "assasins" module added too
[20:24:11] <mhy> h01ger: we'll make sure we co-ordinate with him about it
[20:24:14] <Tincho> des is on holidays atm, I think
[20:24:15] <Ganneff> also upstream is very interested at that controller, so it gets into upstream after des reworked his patch for 0.3.x
[20:24:28] <h01ger> Ganneff, i know you know :) this was to inform for others in the team too :)
[20:24:29] <Ganneff> Tincho: the video controller isnt that important
[20:24:32] <marga> yes, des is on holidays for 2 weeks.
[20:24:42] <Ganneff> he just has to have done it before debconf.
[20:24:49] <Ganneff> its not critical for the CFP
[20:24:53] <Traveler_> Tincho: In fact is on holidays until feb-4
[20:25:04] <marga> ok.
[20:25:11] <Ganneff> as most other changes to pentabarf arent. we just need to make sure it keeps our own data, ie "developer status" and such things
[20:25:20] <Ganneff> ok. i think we are done with it.
[20:25:20] <marga> So, Ganneff, we would be starting registration on Sunday/Monday?
[20:25:21] <Ganneff> one sec
[20:25:23] <h01ger> (we'll want some more changes before debconf too and to define them, we need to see the current status again... )
[20:25:28] <Ganneff> marga: monday/tuesday is realistic, yes.
[20:25:32] <marga> ok.
[20:25:37] <h01ger> Ganneff, please change #topic
[20:25:47] <Ganneff> #agreed Cfp starts around Monday/Tuesday when pentabarf is done
[20:25:49] <Ganneff> h01ger: slow.
[20:25:56] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 4. Call For Papers / Opening of Registration / Timeline
[20:26:00] <Ganneff> there, cfp details.
[20:26:07] <Ganneff> someone please take the floor (away) :)
[20:26:16] <marga> So, if we do it on Tuesday, it'd be Jan 29.
[20:26:39] <Tincho> Ganneff: cpf can start also on the 29? or we need more from penta first?
[20:26:47] <marga> I think March 31st as end of CFP is still good?
[20:26:47] <Ganneff> Tincho: 29 should work out
[20:26:59] <Ganneff> yes
[20:27:01] * h01ger suggest to have a 2 day testrun of penta before we do the cfp
[20:27:16] <Tincho> sounds sane
[20:27:19] <Ganneff> if we close end of march then we have april to decice, maybe begin of april too.
[20:27:25] <Ganneff> h01ger: guess what i will do :)
[20:27:36] <h01ger> Ganneff, one tester is not enough :)
[20:27:45] <Tincho> I'd also try to make people submit abstracts two months before debconf
[20:27:45] <mhy> h01ger: don't worry, there'll be more than one :-)
[20:27:49] <h01ger> real people are more crazy than you :)
[20:27:51] <Ganneff> h01ger: ... what do you think i am?
[20:27:51] <Tincho> or maybe before desicion
[20:28:00] <Ganneff> we *will* test it. eot.
[20:28:00] <marga> Tincho: abstracts? Or papers?
[20:28:05] <beuno> maybe open up registration for localteam and such
[20:28:13] <beuno> that will be 30-40 people maybe
[20:28:13] <marga> Tincho: they have to submit the abstract for the talk to get selected.
[20:28:14] <Ganneff> Tincho: abstracts are in cfp already.
[20:28:23] <Tincho> I mean papers, sorry
[20:28:24] <Ganneff> so you mean papers that early before?
[20:28:32] <Ganneff> would make nice proceedings.
[20:28:32] * h01ger thinks 2months for a CfP which everybody knew was coming is more than enough
[20:28:37] <marga> Tincho: I don't think it's realistic.
[20:28:41] <Tincho> Ganneff: if we want to print them, and not hurry at last minute
[20:28:51] <Ganneff> we will have, again, a flag where people can select if they submit papers or not.
[20:29:01] <marga> Tincho: you need to tell them that the talk got selected so that they prepare the paper.
[20:29:10] <Ganneff> correct.
[20:29:26] <Tincho> ok, not before deciding, but it can be way before debconf
[20:29:36] <Ganneff> we can say "end of june"
[20:29:43] <mhy> I was going to say beginning, but whatever
[20:29:43] <marga> So, if talk selection is done in April, and announced in May, the paper submission should be by end of june, yes.
[20:29:46] <Ganneff> leaving at least whole june to prepare, if we decide damn slow.
[20:29:55] <Tincho> that's 3 months, it's plenty of time
[20:30:00] <mhy> if you say beginning, you might get them by the end :-)
[20:30:04] <marga> Tincho: 2
[20:30:24] <Tincho> marga: how long does the selection take?
[20:30:29] <marga> mhy: uhm... ok.
[20:30:39] <mhy> marga: just my experience from chasing people last year
[20:30:46] <Ganneff> talk selection is a bit of work. take some weeks for it.
[20:30:51] * broonie thinks mhy is entirely realistic
[20:31:05] <Ganneff> we need to have a whole team, again, that looks at all talks. and rates them in pentabarf. then a meeting on irc, to get it finally sorted.
[20:31:09] <Ganneff> that *takes* times.
[20:31:09] <marga> Tincho: Uhm, I guess it can be done quicker than that. Maybe end of April, so that the paper deadline is June 15th?
[20:31:17] <Ganneff> i wouldnt set anything below 3 weeks for it.
[20:31:35] <Tincho> marga: sounds good, so nothing is accepted past June, 30th
[20:31:44] <Ganneff> Tincho: wrong.
[20:31:44] <marga> ok.
[20:31:48] <Tincho> why?
[20:31:49] <Ganneff> bofs are, at least
[20:31:56] <marga> Ganneff: for proceedings.
[20:31:59] <Ganneff> and then we probably have some free slots for talks.
[20:32:00] <Ganneff> ah
[20:32:02] <Tincho> Ganneff: but we can leave them out of print
[20:32:03] <Ganneff> right. not for them, yes.
[20:32:07] <Ganneff> Tincho: yessir.
[20:32:22] <Ganneff> ok. more to this topic?
[20:32:36] <h01ger> isnt a bigger buffer there desirable? maybe in the other direction? to have the decission earlier? as some people (or a lot) want to plan their travels based on the actual talk schedule
[20:32:49] <Ganneff> h01ger: thats not doable
[20:32:57] <Tincho> so, shall we #agree on dates?
[20:33:06] <Ganneff> feel free to.
[20:33:12] <marga> Ok, for the registration bit, we had already agreed on March 31st (same as CFP) for sponsored accom+food, and then one batch of travel-sponsorship grants in April and another in May. Does that still sound ok?
[20:33:21] <Ganneff> si
[20:33:53] <Tincho> 29/1: cpf + registration open; 31/3 cpf + sponsored a+f deadline; 15/5 paper submission deadline
[20:33:54] <marga> h01ger: the talk listing should be available by end of April. The schedule, maybe in July?
[20:34:11] <h01ger> marga, sure. the earlier, the better
[20:34:13] <marga> 15/6 paper submission deadline
[20:34:15] <Ganneff> marga: if we are lucky, yes
[20:34:19] <Tincho> ah yes
[20:34:44] <h01ger> marga, sounds good
[20:34:47] <Ganneff> scheduling is a nice task, and i can imagine mhy wants to volunteer for it. he loved it last year. :)
[20:34:49] <marga> So, I think we agree. Ganneff, you should tell the bot.
[20:34:56] <marga> Ganneff: :)
[20:35:05] <Ganneff> ok, sec.
[20:35:38] <Ganneff> #agree cfp starts on 29 jan, goes until end of march. 31/3 also ends sponsored accom/food, 15/5 is paper submission deadline
[20:35:57] <Ganneff> thats right, or am i blind?
[20:36:12] <marga> No, it's 15/6, again.
[20:36:14] <Ganneff> err. wong
[20:36:15] <Ganneff> yes
[20:36:17] <mhy> I'd like to say in public that I'm *not* doing proceedings, scheduling or anything but networks this year, no matter *what* Ganneff says
[20:36:20] <Ganneff> #agree cfp starts on 29 jan, goes until end of march. 31/3 also ends sponsored accom/food, 15/6 is paper submission deadline
[20:36:21] <ana> mm, question: and if you get a paper accepted but you were rejected sponsored accom/travel?
[20:36:36] <Ganneff> ana: then you come on your own, or talk gets removed.
[20:36:39] <marga> ana: I don't think that would ever happen.
[20:36:41] <Tincho> we'd add talk listing in april, schedule and proceedings in july
[20:36:48] * h01ger wonders if dates are written like 21/01/2008 in .ar (which is the same as in .de :)
[20:36:54] <Tincho> h01ger: yes
[20:36:57] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 5. Sponsorship status
[20:37:03] <Ganneff> sponsorship team, feel free to start
[20:37:04] * Sledge hides
[20:37:07] <marga> ana: we would only reject food+accom to people who really not deserve it.
[20:37:20] <Ganneff> (my text is simple: Lufthansa doesnt sponsor anything outside "environmental projects")
[20:37:21] <h01ger> Ganneff, #agreed cfp starts on 29 jan, goes until end of march. 31/3 also ends sponsored accom/food, 15/6 is paper submission deadline
[20:37:24] * Maulkin hides from Sledge
[20:37:26] <h01ger> Ganneff, you wrote #agree
[20:37:28] <ana> marga: Ganneff ok ok
[20:37:36] <Ganneff> #agreed cfp starts on 29 jan, goes until end of march. 31/3 also ends sponsored accom/food, 15/6 is paper submission deadline
[20:37:46] <Ganneff> Sledge, Maulkin: speak now.
[20:37:49] * h01ger adds a note to teach #agree to meetbot :)
[20:37:51] <Maulkin> NOW
[20:37:59] <Sledge> we have quite a few sponsors committing already
[20:38:01] <Ganneff> no sponsorship this year, it seems
[20:38:03] <Ganneff> ah.
[20:38:14] <ana> Ganneff: reciclying old computers to work with debian is a enviromenal project!=)
[20:38:21] <Ganneff> ana: :)
[20:38:26] <Sledge> I've contacted all of last year's sponsors, or asked the contacts involved to talk to them for me
[20:38:36] <Ganneff> ana: i got a second contact to ask, in a sub of LH, but dont be so optimistic there.
[20:38:39] * Sledge looks meaningfully at Ganneff, h01ger and gwolf
[20:38:48] <Sledge> several have already committed
[20:38:50] <Ganneff> Sledge: sisi! talked to some.
[20:38:54] <beuno> we're planning to start poking local sponsors in mid-march, when people got back from vacations
[20:39:02] <Ganneff> good.
[20:39:03] <Sledge> I need to get back to some of them again with the sponsor pack
[20:39:09] <ana> Ganneff: viel Glück
[20:39:18] <Maulkin> That's a long vacation... :)
[20:39:23] <Sledge> beuno: that sounds like a long way away!
[20:39:30] <Ganneff> ok. any more detail here now, or is it that for this meeting?
[20:39:30] <marga> Maulkin: remember it's summer here. It's the summer holidays.
[20:39:34] <beuno> Sledge, no one will listen to us before
[20:39:41] <h01ger> as said already, freifunk will be able to borrow some APs again. not sure about shipping/taxes though. havent yet asked aruba
[20:40:02] <Ganneff> im trying to find sponsors during cebit again. or contacts.
[20:40:06] <Sledge> I'm going to be talking to a few more previous sponsors again in the hope we can convince them to sign up for DC8 even if they didn't do DC7
[20:40:07] <beuno> Sledge, Maulkin, have you guys presented the sponsors with the "category" structure in the sponsorpack?
[20:40:07] <Ganneff> no guarantee, as usual.
[20:40:09] <Sledge> Ganneff: cool
[20:40:15] <Sledge> beuno: a couple so far
[20:40:18] <Ganneff> if someone wants to join that task on cebit....................
[20:40:32] <Sledge> some of last year's sponsors have already said "yes, same as last year"
[20:40:55] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 6. Visa plans
[20:40:58] <Sledge> I'm going to be politely pushy and see if I can get them to raise the offers in a few cases
[20:41:01] <beuno> Sledge, would be great to keep a close eye on that to see if it's actually beneficial or not.It might need some tweaking, I based the numbers on previous debconfs
[20:41:07] <Sledge> beuno: yup
[20:41:07] <Ganneff> ok. next one. tincho/marga/who?
[20:41:13] <Sledge> Ganneff: whoa!!!
[20:41:20] <Ganneff> Sledge: you have been so silent... :)
[20:41:21] <Sledge> Ganneff: give me a minute or two please
[20:41:24] <Ganneff> ok.
[20:41:26] <marga> Ganneff: I think Sledge had more things to say.
[20:41:26] * Sledge stabs Ganneff
[20:41:28] <Maulkin> WE'll say when done :)
[20:41:30] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 5. continued
[20:41:33] <Ganneff> there.
[20:41:51] <Maulkin> Well, Sledge will. I'll carry on sitting here being sarky.
[20:41:52] <Sledge> I've spoken to a few more friends again, but things are not looking wonderful
[20:42:07] <Sledge> last couple of things from me:
[20:42:30] <Sledge> 1. I need a reasonably realistic budget to aim for soon please
[20:42:47] <Sledge> 2. we need to work out the best way to get money from .eu to .ar for some companies
[20:42:57] <Ganneff> #action Someone need to finalize a more or less realistic budget SOON
[20:43:10] <Sledge> (maybe keep DC7 running rather than *lots* of little transfers to .ar)
[20:43:11] <Ganneff> #action Find a nice way to transfer mney from .eu to .ar
[20:43:22] <Ganneff> Sledge: or go via us, ie. SPI
[20:43:26] <Maulkin> If no one knows how to do budget, I can help.
[20:43:30] <Sledge> maybe, yeah
[20:43:34] <Tincho> Sledge: directly to .ar doesn't work out?
[20:43:35] <Maulkin> Though I do need accurate figures
[20:43:38] <Ganneff> keep in mind, we have ledgersmb
[20:43:42] <Ganneff> so we can use that again for budgetting
[20:43:51] <Sledge> Tincho: it's more hassle for .eu sponsors AFAICS
[20:43:53] <Maulkin> Ganneff: No use for budgetting :)
[20:43:54] <Ganneff> talk to Maulkin or me for access to it / a setup for dc8 in it
[20:44:07] <marga> About the budget, I'll be going to visit the hotel soon, and we'll talk about the definitive numbers then. My aim is for 100k USD _without_ Travel. Then, as much travel as we can.
[20:44:08] <Ganneff> Maulkin: oh. whatever. :)
[20:44:10] <beuno> we need to keep in mind local sponsors won't cough up much money
[20:44:20] <Sledge> I'll be updating the sponsors-table in svn again like last year
[20:44:39] <beuno> there will probably be a few *big* ones that won't add up more the trolltech is putting down
[20:44:39] <Sledge> if people want to help out or contact local sponsors etc. then please do the same
[20:44:47] <marga> Sledge: is it really that much hassle?
[20:44:53] * Sledge nods beuno
[20:45:19] <beuno> Sledge, we will probably get much more equipment lended and such
[20:45:26] <Sledge> marga: not *huge*, but a couple of people were surprised about the contract thing
[20:45:34] <Sledge> marga: we can work it out, anyway
[20:45:38] <marga> Sledge: ok.
[20:45:39] * Maulkin nods
[20:45:42] <Ganneff> now, topic done?
[20:45:45] <Sledge> right, unless there are any more Qs then I'm done
[20:45:59] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 6. Visa plans
[20:46:06] <Ganneff> ok. for whoever knows about visas.
[20:46:25] <marga> Ok, about visas: for most attendees' countries a Visa is not required. For those that is requiered, all the info I could find points that it's very easy to get one.
[20:46:39] <marga> i.e. no "letter of invitation" needed.
[20:46:48] <moray> marga: it wasn't *needed* for the UK
[20:46:54] <beuno> Ganneff, a list of countries which need visas is already up on the webpage, and it will be updated a few months before debconf. A memo to all embassies will be snet out ~4 months beforehand for the people who do need it
[20:46:56] <marga> moray: we are not the UK.
[20:47:13] <beuno> marga, remember about ^ :D
[20:47:22] <Ganneff> ok. so we dont expect huge problems on the visa front?
[20:47:24] <beuno> it will ease the pain for those who *do* need visa
[20:47:28] <beuno> Ganneff, not at all
[20:47:39] <h01ger> Ganneff, always :)
[20:47:43] <Traveler_> Ganneff: I don't think so
[20:47:44] <h01ger> beuno, ^+
[20:47:54] <Ganneff> ok. lets hope it works out like this.
[20:47:54] <moray> I'm sure the system is different, someone needs to take charge of the area though
[20:47:59] <moray> and deal with queries etc.
[20:48:08] <marga> Ok.
[20:48:13] * beuno points to
[20:48:16] * h01ger thinks we are well prepared and .ar seems to be quite easy, but visas always mean problems, trouble and work (for some)
[20:48:37] * beuno can take care of visas inquieries
[20:48:39] <Tincho> we should revive the "teams" wikipage and get people to commit to certain areas
[20:48:45] <h01ger> do we have should we?
[20:48:46] <Ganneff> ok. in case we get people from those countries -> we let them talk to beuno.
[20:48:47] <moray> but I mostly added the point as we should remind people as early as possible if they need it to apply sooner rather than later
[20:48:54] <Ganneff> and we have visa@, i point that at him later on.
[20:49:07] <h01ger> it should be mentioned in the cfp and the please register mails
[20:49:07] <beuno> Ganneff, great, go ahead
[20:49:18] <marga> ok.
[20:49:23] <h01ger> it=people need to make sure to get visas in time
[20:49:46] <Ganneff> yes. we need to make clear that "waiting for sponsorship" is a good way to never get to debconf if you need a visa.
[20:49:54] <h01ger> exactly
[20:49:56] <Ganneff> you have to start the visa process before you know about money.
[20:50:14] <Ganneff> we had some not able to get to dc6 and dc7 due to their late "i need a visa, was waiting for money"
[20:50:15] <moray> and we've found before people do not read information carefully, we need to make it as clear as possible, not just point at sites with lots of pages of details
[20:50:43] <Ganneff> i think this is done for this meeting?
[20:50:43] <marga> ok.
[20:50:52] <Tincho> we should also add something about penalties for not saying that you're not gonna use the sponsored F+A?
[20:50:54] <moray> Ganneff: yeah, last year the only problems were people who waited stupidly late
[20:51:04] <beuno> so "apply for sponsorship once you have a visa" should be stressed upon?
[20:51:07] <Ganneff> Tincho: come back in aob please
[20:51:16] <Ganneff> beuno: no. "apply asap for visa"
[20:51:22] <Tincho> Ganneff: aob?
[20:51:25] <Ganneff> not "wait for anything", no matter in which order
[20:51:29] <Ganneff> Tincho: last point of asgenda
[20:51:30] <Ganneff> -s
[20:51:35] <h01ger> beuno, in parallel
[20:51:35] <maxyz> I must say that burocracy in Argentina takes "longer than expected" so if anybody knows people interested in debconf from countries cited in the webpage please tell them to start papers..
[20:51:45] <Tincho> ok, sorry
[20:51:58] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 7. Press plans
[20:52:01] <Ganneff> there.
[20:52:12] <Ganneff> is madduck on?
[20:52:15] <Ganneff> possibly not.
[20:52:20] <Ganneff> anyone else?
[20:52:45] * marga is not so sure how much press we really do want.
[20:52:53] <marga> We want press for DebianDay, sure.
[20:52:56] <Ganneff> lots. :)
[20:52:58] <Tincho> I only talked with the local people who will help
[20:52:59] <h01ger> marga, why?
[20:53:01] <marga> But what press do we want for DebConf?
[20:53:03] <moray> marga: DebianDay is one aspect
[20:53:07] * h01ger would say "lots" too
[20:53:13] <moray> marga: the other is to get coverage so sponsors are happy
[20:53:14] <Ganneff> marga: reports about it. and stuff. mentioning of it.
[20:53:15] <marga> It's the Debian Dev conference, why do we want press coverage?
[20:53:17] <Ganneff> ie coverage.
[20:53:23] <beuno> marga, more early press, more chance of sponsors
[20:53:25] <mhy> marga: it helps with sponsorship etc
[20:53:26] <moray> marga: sponsors want it, we have been bad at this
[20:53:26] <Ganneff> people should know we are there.
[20:53:38] <moray> marga: it's also just good for Debian to have coverage
[20:53:39] <Ganneff> marga: to make people AKA sponsors happy. to also point others at it, if we want to
[20:53:42] <Tincho> DebianDay is gonna be near two big local conferences, that'll help the press coverage
[20:53:51] <h01ger> marga, to attract more people, new people, good people. to attract sponsors. to show the article to our grandchildrens and the dpl.
[20:53:52] <Ganneff> to remind everyone we (as in DebConf *and* Debian) are there
[20:54:02] <marga> Ok, ok.
[20:54:06] <h01ger> debconf is debians conference. we want press :)
[20:54:25] <h01ger> what is this "universial operating system"? ;)
[20:54:44] <moray> certainly the Debian Day part needs some local help though
[20:54:44] <marga> So, we need to postpone this until madduck is around?
[20:54:49] <marga> moray: yep.
[20:54:51] <moray> and madduck was having trouble getting any, I thnk
[20:54:53] <Ganneff> do we have something more detailed to discuss right now?
[20:55:12] <Ganneff> so next emeting with madduck - or more discussion on the list?
[20:55:15] <moray> (he was sent some contacts before, but he seemd to say he never got any useful response from them)
[20:55:27] <Tincho> moray: the local people didn't wanted to start now
[20:55:40] <Ganneff> Tincho: can you change the minds of them? :)
[20:55:41] <Tincho> but they have managed to get very good local converage for other confs
[20:55:44] <marga> moray: there's people to help, they just feel it's too early.
[20:55:50] <beuno> ASCIIGirl, how about the local people in charge of press? (bea? lukio?)
[20:56:05] <Tincho> Ganneff: I don't think so, they say it's not good to start so early
[20:56:11] <Ganneff> marga: actually - cfp release should be a very good starting point for them
[20:56:24] <ASCIIGirl> beuno: yes, they will do press stuff...they have been in contact with madduck already
[20:56:25] <marga> Ganneff: ok.
[20:56:44] <Ganneff> more to add?
[20:57:12] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 8. Next meeting date
[20:57:17] <Ganneff> first this, then AOB.
[20:57:25] <Ganneff> 3rd monday in februar would be the 18
[20:57:32] <Ganneff> same time as this, ie 20UTC ok?
[20:57:38] <marga> ok for me.
[20:57:54] <sgran> sure
[20:57:56] <Ganneff> #agreed Next meeting will be 18 Februar, 20:00 UTC
[20:58:02] <Ganneff> #topic Meeting | 9. AOB
[20:58:08] <Maulkin> +1-5+3+2
[20:58:11] <Ganneff> whoever has any other thing to discuss: raise hand
[20:58:12] <Maulkin> Me!
[20:58:21] <Ganneff> now. hands down, write in here what you want.
[20:58:22] <Ganneff> :)
[20:58:30] <Tincho> we should also add something about penalties for not saying that you're not gonna use the sponsored F+A?
[20:58:48] <Tincho> we had a lot of problems because of that in dc7
[20:58:49] <Ganneff> Tincho: ie. "you got money assigned, you dont use it, you pay us"?
[20:58:50] <marga> Tincho: I don't think we need to say it to do it.
[20:59:04] <marga> Ganneff: it's difficult if they not come.
[20:59:05] <ana> Ganneff: i agree with that, but they will pay us?
[20:59:05] <Tincho> marga: as a reminder to make people think twice
[20:59:10] <Ganneff> marga: yes.
[20:59:17] <h01ger> Tincho, "optional penalities" - the orga team decides if they will be executed. (people might have valid reasons...)
[20:59:24] <Ganneff> what we could do is an extra field in the database, for the next year.
[20:59:28] <mhy> Maulkin: how much did that cost us at dc7?
[20:59:28] <moray> will we penalise people who "misbehaved" last year then? (I don't remember who/if any did)
[20:59:31] <ana> most of people, when cancels give good reasoning
[20:59:32] <Tincho> h01ger: of course
[20:59:34] <Ganneff> ie a rating which gets them down a year later in the sponsorship queues
[20:59:36] <ana> specially the known people in debian
[20:59:44] <marga> Ganneff: it's more like, "you had sponsored food+accom but didn't come last year, you won't get sponsored accom+food this year".
[20:59:45] <Maulkin> DC7: almost done, still waiting for Sun, about 150GBP to pay for postage for bags. Tax returns can be done and the Government will tell us how much we owe.
[20:59:54] <ana> the people who cancels without telling (or do not come= is usually the unknown people in debian..
[20:59:59] <Maulkin> then the rest can go to .ar
[21:00:05] <Maulkin> mhy: how much did what cost?
[21:00:10] <ana> so just being careful to who is given sponsored A+F...
[21:00:15] <Ganneff> so yes, we should keep notes about that in admin (as in conf admin) fields in pentabarf
[21:00:19] <mhy> Maulkin: 20:58 < Tincho> we had a lot of problems because of that in dc7
[21:00:20] <Ganneff> to store the knowledge over the year
[21:00:24] <mhy> Maulkin: the sponsored F+A
[21:00:35] <Maulkin> No idea.
[21:00:38] <ana> i could grep the Rooms mails and give some names
[21:00:45] <Ganneff> lots of time to shuffle beds around, i think
[21:00:49] * Maulkin didn't deal with accom.
[21:00:54] <Tincho> we discussed about making people pay an amount to be able to confirm attendance, to get that refunded later
[21:00:55] <Maulkin> I just paid bills.
[21:01:00] <moray> if we want to penalise people for being "bad" on this, we should start with those who messed us around last time really
[21:01:04] <ana> i did end dealing with most of the mails of cancelling people
[21:01:04] <Ganneff> ana: can you make a list and mail me or mhy or so, and we include it in database?
[21:01:13] <Tincho> moray: sounds fair
[21:01:15] <ana> Ganneff: sure, but i do not have all the emails
[21:01:19] <ana> only people who mailed me
[21:01:26] <Ganneff> ana: which is a start
[21:01:29] <ana> ok
[21:01:30] <beuno> I think giving them lower priority for next confs is enough
[21:01:57] <moray> beuno: publicising that this is happening would deter people, yes...
[21:02:00] <Ganneff> ok. so whoever remembers something like that from dc7 (or even dc6) mail me and we (me, mhy, sgran) let it end up in pentabarf
[21:02:15] <marga> ok
[21:02:20] <Tincho> I think ana has the better data
[21:02:21] <Ganneff> and we add something to the "you can get sponsorship" info mail about this.
[21:02:23] <Tincho> *best
[21:02:28] <moray> beuno: (though then we'd need to be sure we weren't penalising people who actually had good reasons)
[21:02:29] <marga> I should have dc6 data somewhere.
[21:02:33] <Ganneff> ok. another aob point? sgran?
[21:02:42] <beuno> maybe an "I'm here" field in penta would also help in the future
[21:02:56] <mhy> beuno: we have that in the entrance controller iirc
[21:02:57] <Tincho> beuno: that was done by front desk
[21:02:58] <marga> beuno: there was an "arrived" field.
[21:03:06] <sgran> Mine was about internal wiring and that sort of thing. It can wait until we know more about rooms we have
[21:03:09] <Ganneff> #agreed We will penalise people who got sponsorship but then didnt end up using it, marking them in pentabarf so future confs can keep that in mind.
[21:03:19] <beuno> so it should be easy to have a list of people which didn't attend, and just look up each one
[21:03:22] <h01ger> we could demand a registritation fee, that we pay back if people attend and eat everything which goes on their plate. but... thats also hazzle. otoh, 300 times 50 is some money too
[21:03:23] <Ganneff> yes, we know who arrived.
[21:03:31] <Maulkin> oh, fwiw, people do not register for DebConf in penta. They just turn up.
[21:03:37] <Ganneff> h01ger: that will be hard. from all around the world.
[21:03:44] <h01ger> Ganneff, yup
[21:03:44] <Tincho> why?
[21:03:46] <Ganneff> and then what maulkin said.
[21:03:52] <beuno> Maulkin, but those don't have sponsorship, so it's alright
[21:03:57] <Ganneff> i had an own controller for such people. called "meh"
[21:03:57] <h01ger> Tincho, international money transfer fees
[21:04:00] <Tincho> can't we just receive money from paypal or the such?
[21:04:03] <marga> We can use the SPI thing for that.
[21:04:08] <Ganneff> Tincho: paypal *BAD*
[21:04:10] <marga> SPI can charge credit cards.
[21:04:11] <Maulkin> beuno: not really, if we need to do name badges etc.
[21:04:12] <Ganneff> Tincho: we dont plan on losing money.
[21:04:16] <marga> I have that almost ready.
[21:04:22] <Ganneff> yay
[21:04:30] <Tincho> well, I don't know about paypal, but there should be some alternative
[21:04:33] <ana> h01ger: the problem with that is handled that everybody paied..
[21:04:38] <Maulkin> DC7 ltd can't take credit cards.
[21:04:40] * beuno thinks charging 50usd is a bit much
[21:04:42] <ana> h01ger: i think it is a PITA
[21:04:54] <ASCIIGirl> I think asking for registration fee its going to be a mess...
[21:05:00] <Ganneff> so we can charge. but managing it completly and safe and stuff will be a lot of work
[21:05:02] <Tincho> beuno: much?
[21:05:05] <ana> beuno: for my 50 usd sounds ok, but i can understand is not ok for you...
[21:05:13] <Ganneff> it will be much more work than its probably worth it.
[21:05:26] <Tincho> it is not much at all for .ar, you'll pay more for the bus ticket
[21:05:31] <Ganneff> lets go with the "you get penalised" idea first. if it doesnt work out we can go the "gets charged X usd" next year?!
[21:05:34] <marga> I wanted to charge 10 usd, which would be just symbolic, but I'm not sure if it's worth the hassle.
[21:05:37] <beuno> Tincho, I'm not sure everybody will have 50usd to leave lying around for months and months
[21:05:39] <ana> i repeat: we just need to be more strict with people who is askingsponsored stuff
[21:05:47] <Ganneff> si!
[21:05:54] <beuno> and fo course, there is the hassle of giving the monet back...
[21:05:55] * h01ger definitly nods Ganneff - lets see how it works this year and next year we'll see
[21:06:02] <Maulkin> For me, there's no difference between 50USD and 10USD. It's the fact that it's USD :)
[21:06:12] <Tincho> beuno: I seriously doubt that people who can't have that money are attending debconf
[21:06:13] <marga> Maulkin: :)
[21:06:23] <Tincho> Maulkin: :)
[21:06:23] <Ganneff> Tincho: you lost then
[21:06:28] <Tincho> ok
[21:06:29] * Maulkin can't use SPI, I don't have the right kind of cards
[21:06:30] <Ganneff> Tincho: i know such people did attend
[21:06:32] * h01ger takes a note to not trust Maulkin as treasurer again ;)
[21:06:50] <Ganneff> all ok with "#agreed lets go with the "you get penalised" idea first. if it doesnt work out we can go the "gets charged X usd" next year?!"
[21:06:50] <Ganneff> ?
[21:06:57] <marga> Maulkin: which cards does it accept?
[21:06:58] <h01ger> yes
[21:07:08] <marga> Maulkin: I had no idea about it being too restrictive with that.
[21:07:19] <marga> Ganneff: ok.
[21:07:24] <Maulkin> marga: Dunno. Go as someone who knows somwthing about spi. Oh, wait, damn.
[21:07:32] <Ganneff> #agreed lets go with the "you get penalised" idea first. if it doesnt work out we can go the "gets charged X usd" next year.
[21:07:49] <Ganneff> anyone else with an AOB?
[21:07:51] <moray> if we gave the money back we'd lose quite a lot of money with charges, currency rate changes etc.
[21:07:53] <Ganneff> if not i want to close the meeting.
[21:08:13] <marga> I think we are done.

Meeting ended.

Information on meetbot is available at