i assume people think the debconf organizers are doing fine as usual, while i have a bit the impression we are not. at least not for dc9 ;)
[21:07:43] * cek_ has to leave
[21:07:49] <h01ger> cek, un secundo
[21:07:57] <h01ger> cek, next meeting, when?
[21:07:57] <cek_> h01ger, ok :)
[21:08:05] <cek_> next Monday?
[21:08:17] <h01ger> ui
[21:08:18] <angasule> cek_: anto will be here as well?
[21:08:26] <sgran> Hydroxide: you'll also want to submit a request for debconf-data
[21:08:28] <moray> cek_: when is your physical meeting?
[21:08:31] <h01ger> dont you think atm every two weeks is fine?
[21:08:34] <sgran> (and no, I don't know why they're seperate
[21:08:34] <cek_> anto is sitting here by my side
[21:08:34] <moray> iwth the govt/whoever?
[21:08:48] <cek_> 23rd March?
[21:08:58] <moray> oh, I thought you said next week
[21:09:08] <moray> oh, now you mean for next meeting?
[21:09:12] <cek_> moray, next week hopefully we will meet with someone from the city hall
[21:09:17] <h01ger> same time? cek, suggest a date which you think is best, please
[21:09:26] <h01ger> in 7 or 14 days?
[21:09:35] <cek_> 23rd March 21 CET
[21:09:40] <cek_> 14 days
[21:09:57] <h01ger> gracias! please tell anto as well :)
[21:10:05] <gwolf> 14 days+1 hour then
[21:10:06] <Hydroxide> sgran: no, I already have debconf-data access
[21:10:08] <gwolf> so, 21 CETE?
[21:10:08] <cek_> anto is here reading :)
[21:10:12] <sgran> ok, good enough, then
[21:10:14] <h01ger> gwolf, no, he said 20 UTC / 21 CET
[21:10:18] <gwolf> OH
[21:10:23] * h01ger waves to anto :)
[21:10:25] <gwolf> grah /me grumbles at timezones
[21:10:30] <sgran> h01ger: do you need any other penta changes before you send the mails?
[21:10:44] <h01ger> sgran, iirc thats all. (300 EUR and fixed dates)
[21:10:47] <cek_> anto waves to h01ger :P
[21:10:52] <h01ger> sgran, those tickets would be nice to have
[21:10:59] <sgran> those tickets?
[21:11:10] <h01ger> #agreed next meeting: march 23rd, 20 utc
[21:11:13] <h01ger> sgran, rt#911, rt#699, rt#244
[21:11:18] <h01ger> sgran, rt#564
[21:11:35] <h01ger> so what do you think about a RFH to d-d-a?
[21:12:21] <moray> h01ger: I'm not sure if it would help unless it was very specific
[21:12:44] <moray> else people will just ignore it and/or think debconf-orga is falling apart
[21:12:48] * h01ger adds visa stuff to next meetings agenda..
[21:12:51] * cek_ leaves anto alone
[21:13:01] <Hydroxide> moray: which it's really not in the long run - we're just way behind for this year
[21:13:05] <moray> yes
[21:13:10] <cek_> I am late, see you soon!!!
[21:13:15] <moray> we could ask people to move to Cacares to help ;)
[21:13:19] <Hydroxide> haha :)
[21:13:19] <moray> that would be the most useful thing...
[21:13:59] <moray> actually, if we're sending out the registration info v. soon, we could at least spam all the people who register early about helping
[21:14:05] <h01ger> guess it boils down to that someone would need to write it...
[21:14:06] <sgran> 564 I'm not going to make a decision about unilaterally. 911 is a correct response to someone putting dates outside the conference range (at first glance), 699 roughly more of the same (the system is not designed to care about dates outside of the conference span), 244 is asking for stricter date validation rather than looser
[21:14:23] <sgran> so, you can't please everyone, and none of those are likely to be dealt with tonight
[21:14:40] <h01ger> sgran, thanks "anyway"!(!) :)
[21:15:11] * angasule would love to move there early :)
[21:15:21] <gwolf> sgran: IIRC 911 was mine
[21:15:26] * h01ger will look into adding a small blurb for helping to registration.txt
[21:15:36] <h01ger> thank you all for attending!
[21:15:36] <gwolf> it is a couple of weeks old though, but I _did_ try to register with DC9 dates.
[21:15:40] <sgran> gwolf: yes, I think it is
[21:15:42] <h01ger> #endmeeting
Information on meetbot is available at meetbot.debian.net