20:00:10 <darst> #startmeeting
20:00:10 <MeetBot> Meeting started Tue Jan 11 20:00:10 2011 UTC.  The chair is darst. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:00:10 <MeetBot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
20:00:24 <darst> hi, who all is here ?
20:00:25 <moray> do we have some local team?
20:00:29 * Ganneff 
20:00:41 <AbsintheSyringe> yep
20:00:48 <aroundthfur> yup
20:00:49 <darst> our agenda is here: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf11/Meetings, and we'll try to go fast - most things can be rubber-stamped and delegated
20:01:14 <darst> #topic DC10 final report
20:01:22 <darst> So, we've gotten plenty of mails about the report
20:01:33 <darst> http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/FinalReport
20:01:49 <darst> jan 23rd (12 days) is when "texts are due"
20:02:08 <darst> does anyone have any ideas to make this less painful than past years?
20:02:14 <darst> or would anyone like to volunteer to write something?
20:02:45 <moray> darst: I have helping on this on my to-do list (and now nearer the top)
20:02:45 <darst> I don't think there is much to discuss, we need authors, we can get proofreaders from IRC, DrDub volunteer to help assemble...
20:02:50 * gwolf signs up for social events, although would like somebody else to review+complete with more than one viewpoint
20:02:53 <DrDub> I feel we should move into pointing fingers to people and saying "you! write XYZ"
20:03:02 <DrDub> darst: that's correct
20:03:07 <gwolf> DrDub: yes, for some areas that is it
20:03:24 <darst> #action gwolf signs up for social events, although would like somebody else to review+complete with more than one viewpoint
20:03:26 <DrDub> I liked Moray idea of fishing blog postings
20:03:33 <marcot> gwolf: I can help you with social events.
20:03:41 <Ganneff> fishing blog posts - ask for licenses
20:03:42 <darst> #action DrDub will help assemble when time comes
20:03:56 <darst> #action marcot will help with social events
20:03:57 <gwolf> marcot: great - I'll try to get a basis done by tonight
20:04:00 <moray> Ganneff: or ask "can we use this in the report under its licence", most will just say yes
20:04:04 <DrDub> haven't have time to go around doing that
20:04:06 <gwolf> marcot: we should coordinate in private :)
20:04:15 <darst> can someone scour planet debion for old posts ?
20:04:30 <Ganneff> moray: however you ask, but yes, one needs to ask, most blogs arent to reuse...
20:04:58 <moray> darst: I can look for some posts I guess, I'm less sure about having time to get permissions
20:05:00 <DrDub> aroundthfur: how are you at your end? feel like scouring?
20:05:03 <gwolf> darst: AFAIK planet does not keep history, it's more a matter of fishing each individual blog
20:05:10 <moray> gwolf: there's a Planet search
20:05:13 <Ganneff> planet keeps a search
20:05:22 <gwolf> oh - /me shuts up
20:05:24 <darst> moray: if you can get links, I can mail if no one else dose, sound good ?
20:05:25 <aroundthfur> DrDub, i can do it, but i have exams
20:05:43 <DrDub> aroundthfur: don't worry
20:05:48 <moray> so it's "search for debconf, dc10, debconf10, New York, NYC, etc."
20:05:49 <aroundthfur> i'll try and scour as much as i can
20:06:07 <DrDub> it's OK, you can help later to secure the permissions
20:06:08 <moray> darst: ok, let's discuss it post-meeting
20:06:14 <darst> #action moray, aroundthfur scour for blog posts for personal impressions
20:06:17 <darst> yeah
20:06:24 <aroundthfur> DrDub, my exams are until 02.02 :D
20:06:29 <darst> debcamp article ?
20:06:35 <darst> video team ?
20:06:36 <aroundthfur> so i'll just do it in the mean time
20:06:39 <aroundthfur> ;)
20:06:42 <AbsintheSyringe> I wanna help out with final report as well, I just didn't have time to get involved with it yet, but I'll be free in following days
20:06:51 <moray> darst: can you think of someone who was there and not local team?
20:06:54 <DrDub> aroundthfur: I see. Good luck
20:06:59 <aroundthfur> DrDub, tnx
20:07:01 <moray> darst: (to write the debcamp part)
20:07:19 <darst> moray: I'll think after the meeting, but I think I could
20:07:30 <darst> can we follow up on mailing list now?
20:07:45 * h01ger wont have much time the next 2 months for debconf (re: video article. i can review and gives some infos though)
20:07:57 <darst> #info follow up on mailing list about report
20:08:06 <darst> h01ger: could you prod someone from #debconf-video ?
20:08:25 <h01ger> not sure
20:08:28 <darst> ok
20:08:31 <h01ger> dc10 killed edrz
20:08:36 <darst> we'll talk later
20:08:37 <h01ger> or such ;)
20:08:42 <darst> #topic Sponsor packages and media sponsors category
20:08:50 <aroundthfur> ooh finally :D
20:08:51 <darst> who was in charge of this topic
20:08:55 <aroundthfur> me
20:09:06 <aroundthfur> and ok..so here goes
20:09:21 <marcot> darst: I can also help with the video team part.
20:09:24 <aroundthfur> the local team agreed on making the sponsor packages as in DC9
20:09:38 <aroundthfur> because we asked around
20:09:43 <darst> #action marcot can help with video team article for DC10 final report
20:09:46 <darst> marcot: tahnks
20:09:51 <DrDub> (making the sponsor brackets as in DC9)
20:09:53 <flaggy> I can help as well
20:09:56 <aroundthfur> and ppl told us the DC10 levels were to high..
20:10:10 <flaggy> with the video team
20:10:18 <aroundthfur> so now we need to agree on this
20:10:19 <aroundthfur> or not?
20:10:24 <DrDub> #info sponsor brackets will be as DC9
20:10:33 <darst> it sounded like people agreed on DC9 sponsor levels ?
20:10:37 <aroundthfur> but we need this asap, as we need to finish the brochure
20:10:39 <moray> yes, I think so
20:10:42 <darst> #agreed sponsor brackets will be as DC9
20:10:46 <aroundthfur> sweet
20:10:55 <darst> anything else, or can you take it from here ?
20:10:58 <moray> but someone seemed to raise again the "have different local categories" idea, now for media?
20:10:59 <Clint> does that include the threshold change for website logo?
20:11:02 <AbsintheSyringe> I believe that part is agreed, what we haven't agreed is what to do with media "sponsors"
20:11:08 <AbsintheSyringe> moray, yes
20:11:11 <aroundthfur> darst, that's it about that topic
20:11:15 <vedran_omeragic> for those not familiar with topic, some of you suggested about a month ago, the plan was to separate LM from permanent sponsors to new category, "media sponsors"
20:11:22 <Ganneff> yes
20:11:23 <moray> I'm still unconvinced by separating local and global, for the same reasons people argued in the main case
20:11:33 <vedran_omeragic> if we're to go through with this plan, we need to first define this category
20:11:41 <gwolf> Also, a way to include not-economic donations
20:11:44 <vedran_omeragic> its benefits and its requirements
20:11:51 <DrDub> Clint: I don't agree with that change, which is silly and unasked for, thanks for bringing it up.
20:12:30 <h01ger> .oO( rename steel to local sponsor? )
20:12:57 <moray> h01ger: I don't see the benefit in that, though?
20:13:02 <Clint> DrDub: hmm, let's talk about it later then
20:13:12 <vedran_omeragic> h01ger, is it wise... some of the global sponsors may not choose to pay more than min...
20:13:15 <darst> so we have a) global vs local sponsors  and  b) website logo criteria
20:13:24 <Ganneff> website logo? wus?
20:13:25 <h01ger> moray, "easy solution" ;)
20:13:34 <aroundthfur> h01ger, we dont want local and global sponsors
20:13:38 <aroundthfur> just for the media sponsors
20:13:39 <darst> straw poll now on yay/nay, and discuss later on lists ?
20:13:42 <moray> on (a), IMO we always had some local companies who couldn't pay as much as HP etc., but I don't see a reason to split it
20:13:42 <Ganneff> what we had with media sponsors is "lm is a permenant sponsor right now", and thats wrong
20:13:42 * h01ger suggests to talk about those subtopics seperatly
20:13:47 <aroundthfur> and we need to define this media sponsors thingy...
20:13:57 <moray> and (still (a)) I again don't see the reason to split it within media sponsors
20:14:00 <darst> #topic global vs local sponsors
20:14:13 <AbsintheSyringe> there's not global vs local sponsors
20:14:14 <DrDub> Ganneff: why is that wrong?
20:14:17 <darst> #info this is now about "local media" and "global media" sponsors
20:14:21 <AbsintheSyringe> it's all same sponsors
20:14:22 <aroundthfur> the local team is not for spliting
20:14:24 <Ganneff> DrDub: cos they arent.
20:14:29 <h01ger> DrDub, Ganneff: later, please
20:14:41 <Ganneff> DrDub: they sponsor yearly. permanent sponsor the whole year, no matter if there is a conf or not
20:14:56 <h01ger> aroundthfur, so the local team just proposes lower levels instead?
20:14:58 <aroundthfur> ok, could we please first define the media sponsors?
20:15:03 <vedran_omeragic> local team has agreed that making a separate plans for local and global sponsors may cause some serious problems with existing sponsors
20:15:04 <aroundthfur> h01ger, no
20:15:18 <aroundthfur> we just wanted local and global MEDIA sponsors
20:15:25 <DrDub> Ganneff: we should talk. I disagree with your view.
20:15:26 <h01ger> vedran_omeragic, is so, this topic is moot and we can move the next.
20:15:27 <h01ger> ah
20:15:27 <moray> aroundthfur: I don't think we need more than 'sponsors which make sense to put as media sponsors' for now?  can't we leave this to the sponsorship team?
20:15:32 <darst> guise: topic at hand: who is yay/nay for local/global media sponsors ?
20:15:33 <aroundthfur> as i talked about on the list and in the -sponsors channel
20:15:34 <moray> aroundthfur: right, but why do you want to split those?
20:15:35 <h01ger> DrDub, yes. later. in 5min :)
20:15:50 <moray> aroundthfur: I saw it proposed, but it seems exactly the same as the non-media case, where we already agreed not to split
20:15:56 <h01ger> darst, i still dont get what its about. what the diff is
20:16:01 <Ganneff> DrDub: all permanent sponsors do give us hardfware, bandwidth, whatever all year round. LM gives us media coverage around a conf. nothing all year round. quite different.
20:16:03 <darst> I'm not quite sure either
20:16:08 <AbsintheSyringe> I think we should conclude this in sponsors list cuz it's going in wrong direction
20:16:23 <darst> aroundthfur: what is an example of a local media sponsor, and an example of a global one ?
20:16:24 <AbsintheSyringe> we need to present our idea what we meant by "seperating" "normaln" sponsors vs media sponsors
20:16:35 <Ganneff> DrDub: i dont say LM sponsorship is bad or unwanted, i just dont think its what was "permanent" all the time
20:16:37 <DrDub> Ganneff: first, they have a year-long committement that we use to get sponsors for the next year
20:16:40 <aroundthfur> darst, global == linuxmagazine
20:16:47 <aroundthfur> local == national tv for example..
20:16:54 <moray> DrDub: can we keep that discussion separate?
20:16:54 <Ganneff> DrDub: and? then hp, intel, canonical and whatnot also move to permanent
20:16:55 <DrDub> Ganneff: second, that's how *you* define permanent sponsorpship
20:17:08 <darst> (if we can't define what we are discussion soon, we should move on)
20:17:09 <aroundthfur> the reason for this is that the local media will only advertise dc in our region..
20:17:14 <darst> Ganneff, DrDub: on list please
20:17:23 <AbsintheSyringe> darst, please move on
20:17:26 <aroundthfur> ok can we just talk about this in -sponsors later?
20:17:29 <darst> ok
20:17:31 <moray> aroundthfur: but in your example, 'national TV' might be worth much more than 'international magazine', based on prices, I don't see a reason to split
20:17:32 <aroundthfur> but this week please!
20:17:35 <h01ger> aroundthfur, no this is what a meeting is for
20:17:46 <aroundthfur> ooh ok..
20:17:47 <Ganneff> when we put all on list we can stop meetings
20:17:52 * h01ger also dont see how a media sponsor categhory is useful
20:17:59 <darst> #agreed discuss this on list, once the topic is defined better
20:18:00 <DrDub> h01ger: it is useful
20:18:11 <h01ger> Ganneff, yes, but you and DrDub talked about another subtopic then the rest of us here. didnt help
20:18:13 <darst> (since we aret' getting anywhere here)
20:18:18 <moray> DrDub: it's useful, but there are at least three topics going on at the same time...
20:18:23 <DrDub> h01ger: it allows to have all people who are competitors next to each other easily.
20:18:30 <darst> Clint: was there something about website logo level ?
20:18:34 <h01ger> is /topic still right?
20:18:35 <Clint> is the problem that you are expecting the global magazines to get upset if they're listed with balkan ones?
20:18:46 <Ganneff> ?
20:18:55 <Clint> darst: i thought so
20:18:58 <h01ger> Clint, no. i would just rather estimate the value and put them amoungst the others
20:19:05 <DrDub> I though the global vs local was about money they put to sponsor
20:19:11 <DrDub> exactly
20:19:11 <moray> h01ger: that's still what I and some others are talking about, yes :)
20:19:29 <DrDub> we don't need to make the global vs. local explicity on the category
20:19:34 <moray> I don't see any reason to split based on local/national rather than just ranking like we normally do
20:19:38 <darst> who is opposed to moving on and discusing this on list?
20:19:39 <h01ger> darst, please change topic
20:19:46 <h01ger> darst, me
20:19:47 <AbsintheSyringe> we won't make any separations
20:19:55 <AbsintheSyringe> it's all going to be ONE category for sponsors, both local and global
20:19:57 <DrDub> moray: sounds good
20:20:02 <darst> #topic Organizational meeting / new member meeting
20:20:08 <AbsintheSyringe> what aroundthfur wanted to say is something different, which I'll present in sponsors list later on
20:20:10 <h01ger> darst, aeh
20:20:15 <h01ger> we need to discuss levels too
20:20:20 <darst> ok, sorry
20:20:23 <h01ger> and possible changes in what they give
20:20:23 <darst> #topic Sponsor levels
20:20:29 <darst> DrDub: ?
20:20:42 <DrDub> darst, yes
20:20:52 <h01ger> is there a wiki page with the proposal?
20:21:02 <darst> yes, link please
20:21:04 <h01ger> if not, we should create one, so we know what we're talking about
20:21:07 <DrDub> the issue is we're dropping benefits historically were granted to certain levels
20:21:16 <DrDub> (I don't remember being a wiki page)
20:21:33 <gwolf> we are interchanging some privileges between levels - Not in the way I'm most comfortable with, though...
20:21:42 <DrDub> there's a brochure
20:21:51 <h01ger> where?
20:21:52 <DrDub> gwolf: exactly
20:22:03 <gwolf> DrDub: but still, I guess this will not surprise potential sponsors - It's common for organizations to restructure their plans
20:22:25 <DrDub> gwolf: and the rationale so far for the changes has been just not particularly well backed up IMHO
20:22:29 <h01ger> http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf9/Sponsors was very clear
20:22:36 <h01ger> what are the planned numbers for this year?
20:22:45 <DrDub> h01ger: budget?
20:22:52 <h01ger> DrDub, what?
20:22:55 <h01ger> no
20:22:56 <h01ger> sponsors
20:22:59 <moray> it sounds like we need to hold approving something until there's a clearer proposal?
20:23:09 * h01ger nods moray
20:23:10 <darst> can someo dig up the archive message describing the levels ?
20:23:21 <h01ger> +put them on the wiki
20:23:24 <DrDub> moray: but we need to get this movin
20:23:26 <h01ger> ^^ localteam
20:23:27 <moray> we can approve "same as DC9", but "same as DC9 except some random changes" needs to be set out more
20:23:28 <darst> who will be in charge of making the proposal on wiki + list ?
20:23:55 <DrDub> darst: OK, I'll do it
20:24:01 <darst> thanks
20:24:05 <DrDub> with help from aroundthfur...? ;-)
20:24:10 <aroundthfur> DrDub, yup
20:24:17 <h01ger> great
20:24:25 <darst> #action DrDub and aroundthfur make concrete documentation of sponsor levels for approval later
20:24:30 <DrDub> let's try to get it done this week, people
20:24:34 <moray> DrDub: ok, please try to understand the motivations of the suggested changes and either present them or come up with another way to fix that
20:24:37 <h01ger> also please create a wiki page or put it in svn
20:24:38 <DrDub> there are sponsors waiting for the brochure right now
20:24:39 <aroundthfur> DrDub, yes please!
20:24:45 <vedran_omeragic> darst, count me in as well
20:24:46 <h01ger> but not just on the mailinglist
20:25:08 <DrDub> moray: how do you address something like "I don't like lots of logos on the website"?
20:25:15 <darst> #aciton vedran_omeragic also helps with sponsor levels
20:25:19 <darst> #action vedran_omeragic also helps with sponsor levels
20:25:25 <darst> anyone opposed to moving on now?
20:25:32 <DrDub> please move on
20:25:33 <darst> is there another sponsor-related topic ?
20:25:43 <Ganneff> what DrDub and i discussed
20:25:50 <darst> that is for list
20:25:55 <darst> #topic Organizational meeting / new member meeting
20:26:05 <Ganneff> *sigh*
20:26:06 <darst> http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf11/Teams
20:26:13 <h01ger> was there anyone besides DrDub in favor media sponsors?
20:26:18 <h01ger> s/was/is/
20:26:21 <Clint> i am
20:26:24 * Ganneff 
20:26:26 <moray> h01ger: I'm happy making it a different category
20:26:31 <Ganneff> and out of permanent with em
20:26:38 <moray> h01ger: it's clearer than making up fake numbers to sort them in the main list
20:26:43 <h01ger> ah
20:26:47 <h01ger> makes sense to me now too
20:26:52 <darst> so agreed on media sponsors ?
20:26:57 * gwolf agrees
20:27:06 <darst> #agreed Make a media sponsors category
20:27:17 <darst> #topic Organizational meeting / new member meeting
20:27:18 <h01ger> make 2?
20:27:23 <darst> http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf11/Teams
20:27:24 <h01ger> worldwide + reginal?
20:27:27 <bdale> I prefer 'media sponsors' to this idea of 'permanent sponsors' as a category a company like HP can't qualify for
20:27:29 <h01ger> regional
20:27:41 <moray> h01ger: please not split regional/global, unless there's a good reason
20:27:45 <h01ger> value
20:27:56 <AbsintheSyringe> rather have it media sponsors who give money and those who don't
20:27:57 <Ganneff> bdale: didnt say HP cant, but if we go this way, soon we have all in permanent, and that seems silly :)
20:28:03 <moray> h01ger: that's what sorting/logo size/whatever is for
20:28:11 <gwolf> I agree with moray, I'd prefer not to split local/global
20:28:12 <h01ger> i dont care the region (ie if someone from canada is a canadian media sponsor for dc11 i think thats good, but regional.
20:28:13 <AbsintheSyringe> rather just advertise the whole event by posting post about it and so on
20:28:23 <darst> what do you say postpone the local/global media levels to the concrete proposal ?
20:28:26 <h01ger> moray, i thought all media sponsors would be in the same category?
20:28:29 <DrDub> Ganneff: there is plenty of value for that, but you never replied to my proposal on list
20:28:33 <h01ger> darst, right
20:28:37 <darst> ok
20:28:39 <bdale> frankly, once you get away from the top N sponsors, having lots of little distinctions between the rest isn't very useful I think
20:28:48 <darst> =====
20:28:51 <darst> organizational meeting
20:28:52 <DrDub> Ganneff: I'm trying to move on with the meeting
20:28:54 <Ganneff> DrDub: im not much up2date with the list. still 16k mails waiting to get read in my mailbox
20:28:59 <darst> purpose of this is to fill out the Teams list
20:28:59 * h01ger nods bdale (and darst :)
20:29:07 * bdale apologizes, just arrived and was catching up
20:29:14 <darst> it was very useful for DC9 to movitavte poeple and get stuff assigned
20:29:21 <moray> bdale: (yes, and otherwise it sounds like we'll need a 3-D matrix at least for these categories)
20:29:22 <darst> and I also though to combine it with a call for more help
20:29:27 <Ganneff> darst: well. this is one you can send via the list and let people fill in. and then next meeting fill those left open
20:29:28 <moray> darst: sounds a good idea
20:29:39 * h01ger nods
20:29:39 <Ganneff> (the wiki page seems very virgin)
20:29:51 * DrDub read the WB last night and liked the text.
20:29:52 <darst> anyone opposed to the next meeting dedicated to assembling teams (after list-setup) ?
20:30:01 <fil> bdale: quite, we seem to get bogged down in precisely sorting the minows
20:30:04 <darst> (yes, lots of room to sign up now)
20:30:09 <moray> darst: we should also try to 'encourage' back in more some of the people who took time off for DC10
20:30:13 * gwolf hands darst a 3D printer for explaining us the outcome
20:30:29 <gwolf> s/darst/moray/, sorry
20:30:34 <darst> #agreed organization meeting + recruitment calls to blogs/d-d-a
20:30:50 <darst> #action darst assembles the next organizational meeting / calls
20:31:10 <darst> #topic Allow sponsors to present a "poster"
20:31:34 <darst> we had talked about a poster session on the lists, but this is more specific right now
20:31:35 <Ganneff> i would sort that into some levels
20:31:38 <Ganneff> ?
20:31:40 <moray> I don't see any problem with this, though it seems slightly confused with the "allow academic people to present a poster" thing
20:31:53 <moray> if we allow any academic to do it, sponsors who've "paid" for it will be annoyed
20:32:06 <DrDub> moray: au contraire
20:32:19 <darst> is anyone apposed to allowing sponsors (of some level) to have a poster in a prominent place ?
20:32:23 <DrDub> moray: only sponsorship posters won't attract much interest
20:32:37 <fil> I think the default should be something like allowing anybody attending to do it, and allow sponsors as well, even if not attending
20:32:42 <darst> moray: that is a good point, but from talking with DrDub I think the sponsorship team can swing it so it'll work
20:32:45 <gwolf> Besides, it's not as much as "allowing" - Anybody can completely unofficially put up a poster and explain i
20:32:46 <Ganneff> you can have sponsor posters in a more prominent location
20:32:57 <gwolf> more than allowing, we'd be alloting a designated place for them
20:33:00 <Ganneff> like hotel entry or so. and non-paid for ones like in hacklabs. or wherever
20:33:05 <DrDub> darst: I'm in favor, just to be noted, they'll have to have aperson to take care of the poster and it will only be for a period of time
20:33:09 <moray> anyway, I've always been on the "allow sponsors stuff they want" end, so if they want it, great
20:33:32 <gwolf> I'd put together all posters, academic and sponsor... It should not be too different. And having them together might attract more people to look at either
20:33:37 <moray> (as long as they realise we won't force people to look at it)
20:33:48 <darst> it sounds like people broadly agree here, with details to be worked out by sponsorship/academic teams later.  Anyone opposed ?
20:33:51 * Ganneff could bet we get another tk banner with hw
20:33:59 <DrDub> it seems we hav a good agreement
20:34:12 <Ganneff> like at dc9
20:34:37 <darst> #agreed Sponsor posters fine, attendees poster fine, details worked out by sponsorship/talks teams
20:34:52 <darst> #topic Making email aliases
20:34:53 <vedran_omeragic> should this be included in brochure?
20:35:03 <darst> this topic can mostly be handled after the meeting
20:35:04 <h01ger> what do we have to discuss here?
20:35:07 <Ganneff> email aliases.... we currently have (besides a number of admin and others):
20:35:08 <DrDub> vedran_omeragic: yes, it is important
20:35:08 <Ganneff> committee, schedule, papers, registration, herb, ffis, laundry, sponsorship, money, report, numbers, visa, rooms, talks, assassins, debcamp, venue, debianday
20:35:14 <vedran_omeragic> DrDub, ok,
20:35:29 <darst> #info current aliases: committee, schedule, papers, registration, herb, ffis, laundry, sponsorship, money, report, numbers, visa, rooms, talks, assassins, debcamp, venue, debianday
20:35:31 <Ganneff> routed to various people, not neccessarily all used at dc10
20:35:34 <aroundthfur> Ganneff, i just thought we should assign ppl to each of these...
20:35:36 * h01ger suggests to remove laundry@ :)
20:35:37 <moray> Ganneff: I'd worry more about where the existing ones point rather than making more :)
20:35:45 <tiago> add video@ ?
20:35:46 <h01ger> +herb
20:35:51 <Ganneff> moray: i dont care in whichever way.
20:35:57 <h01ger> tiago, there is video@
20:36:03 <tiago> ok
20:36:06 <darst> this should be followed up on list.  any objections?
20:36:17 <Ganneff> i dont care where they go
20:36:20 <Ganneff> or if we get more or less
20:36:25 <darst> we all agree to make them useful and not make too many excess ones
20:36:25 <Ganneff> come up with lists of targets
20:36:34 <Ganneff> we should take the main ones over
20:36:42 <Ganneff> like talks, committee, herbb, the ones people DO know
20:36:44 <Ganneff> from the past
20:36:52 * h01ger thinsk this is for list + localteam too
20:36:59 <Ganneff> but otherwise, whatever, come up with a list to admin@ :)
20:37:02 <darst> #info before using an alias for DC11, make sure it points to the right group, talk to admins, no more to say
20:37:14 <darst> #topic Standards of respect policy
20:37:18 <Ganneff> gnargs
20:37:33 <darst> We have a text that is well-discussed
20:38:06 <gwolf> I just sent (yesterday IIRC) a link to antiharrassment@d.o - http://blog.urth.org/2011/01/creating-the-perfect-anti-harassment-policy.html
20:38:06 <darst> I think before it is put up we should have people who agree to stand behind it at the conf itself (the point-of-contacts)
20:38:06 <moray> darst: link to which exact version you mean?  I didn't remember a final conclusion
20:38:30 <darst> http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/StandardsOfRespect#Short_version is most-discussed
20:38:46 <gwolf> that text addresses some interesting points - I have not been much into the discussion... but found it interesting
20:38:49 <darst> I think final decision/wording is up to whoever volunteers + approval by us
20:39:24 <darst> sub-topic: using antiharassment@debian.org - yay/nay ?
20:39:29 * DrDub hopes for a no holds barred heated argument about standards of respect ;-)
20:39:40 <darst> DrDub: but only on the list!
20:39:41 <gwolf> darst: heh, I assumed it was already active!
20:39:44 * h01ger suggests to agree on the short version and move to the next point :)
20:39:51 <DrDub> darst: yay for an alias. Antiharassment isn't too long?
20:39:54 <darst> gwolf: it is active, but should DebConf use it ?
20:40:06 <moray> DrDub: I feel I should make some racist comment in response to that "no holds barred heated argument" suggestion ;)
20:40:12 <gwolf> DrDub: It's long enough to make you think twice if you really need it ;-)
20:40:27 <DrDub> good points, good points.
20:40:28 <gwolf> darst: It was in good measure created for us to use it...
20:40:29 <moray> though I just realised people will probably spell it wrong...
20:40:34 <darst> DrDub: I would  have liked somehing else, but debian-women decided on that...
20:40:37 <DrDub> agreed with h01ger about the short version
20:40:38 <Ganneff_> the text is just plain common sense, no need to have it.
20:40:39 <Ganneff_> bah
20:40:59 <h01ger> Ganneff, sadly its not common sense.
20:41:12 <DrDub> Ganneff: fair point, but it can help in a larger scheme of things
20:41:19 <Ganneff> imo it hurts more than it helps
20:41:28 <vedran_omeragic> I agree with the Ganneff ,while I have nothing against he policy itself, I really consider it unnecessary, and I seriously doubt it can change much...
20:41:32 <DrDub> darst: I see, the antiharassement@ is good then
20:41:35 <h01ger> if it were common sense, we wouldnt have this discussion
20:41:36 <gwolf> Ganneff: I'd also say it's common sense and I'd also say we don't really need it, but several people have said we really do
20:41:39 * fil likes the wording that says "...create a welcoming environment. If you notice such behavior ... please speak up"  ;-)
20:41:53 <gwolf> I hope it can be existant but unused...
20:41:56 <darst> ok, we can't get into a debate about it now - on list
20:41:59 <vedran_omeragic> and if you're going with email, I suggest legal@ rather than antihrr...
20:42:12 <moray> it's definitely not 'legal'
20:42:15 <darst> right now is only about alias and *who* does it
20:42:18 <darst> respect@
20:42:21 <gwolf> vedran_omeragic: it's completely a different thing
20:42:35 <Ganneff> whoever will be behind such an alias - my condolence. reporting every single hug. good fun.... (come up with it and it will be exploited, just to show how dumb it is)
20:42:36 <DrDub> I like 'issues@'
20:43:00 <darst> for now let us decide: use debian alias, or make a debconf alias ?
20:43:13 <vedran_omeragic> gwolf, was trying to say antih. is too long :)
20:43:21 <Ganneff> the past was pretty simple: goto debconf orga when you have trouble, whichever way.
20:43:28 <h01ger> vedran_omeragic, its not about legal vs illegal
20:43:29 <faw> darst, can't we have both?
20:43:30 <moray> darst: debconf one, for now pointing to debian one?
20:43:37 <darst> moray: good idea
20:43:41 <Ganneff> i dont see why this needs to change. people can ALWAYS and everywhere talk to the orga (or whom they trust around)
20:43:42 <DrDub> yay
20:43:56 <gwolf> faw: We can route every uncatched *@debconf.org - That'd be open for abuse. At least by spammers. ;-)
20:44:09 <Ganneff> gwolf: you want this to your inbox?
20:44:11 <h01ger> darst, i think we should use our own alias, maybe only to point it to the debian one. (but in case the debian alias owner dont attend..)
20:44:12 <darst> antiharassment@debconf.org or issues@debconf.org respect@debconf.org or decid later ?
20:44:13 <DrDub> Ganneff: maybe some people don't really know orga well and prefer cold e-mail aliases?
20:44:16 <gwolf> Ganneff: nothankyouverymuch.
20:44:16 <faw> gwolf, no, I mean, the same thing moray said
20:44:22 <moray> darst: same as @debian, therefore antiharrassment I guess
20:44:31 * h01ger is in favor of the same local part as debian uses
20:44:51 * DrDub convinced about it
20:44:52 <darst> any opposed anymore to antiharassment@dc.org point to debian one for now ?
20:44:55 <Ganneff> DrDub: they will know SOMEONE at debconf well... or they are just wrong anyways, kind of conf like debconf is
20:44:58 * fil is with Ganneff -- do we have any evidence that there is some poor soul that was so intimidated by the existing setup that they went and hid?
20:45:15 <Ganneff> DrDub: yes
20:45:16 <Ganneff> darst: yes
20:45:23 <h01ger> fil, ?
20:45:30 <darst> who else is in favor ?
20:45:45 <darst> Ganneff: does it hurt you?
20:46:07 <Ganneff> it hurts me to think that i want to meet with a group of people who cant handle such a thing without a written policy
20:46:25 <DrDub> Ganneff: that's usually the case as the group gets larger
20:46:26 <Ganneff> and tons of mail addresses and stuff
20:46:34 <darst> the people it is trying to help think it helps, hardly affects anyone else, so that is enough to say "yes" to me
20:47:11 <DrDub> also, note these are standards of respect for attendees. We can keep calling each other names as usual ;-)
20:47:33 <aroundthfur> DrDub, :D
20:47:45 * tiago agrees with Ganneff
20:47:46 <Ganneff> "the people it is trying to help"? i fail to see / remember em at debconfs
20:47:49 <darst> I personally think the number of people in favor (not just now but having asked in the past) is large enough to do it.  Say "yay" if you support, "nay" otherwise
20:47:50 <h01ger> yay
20:48:09 <darst> or "discuss later"
20:48:20 <gwolf> darst: discuss later means no
20:48:26 <gwolf> means rehash every couple of months
20:48:27 <Ganneff> did we really had them (see fil in backlog) some hiding?
20:48:28 <tiago> kind of dumb responsability for orga team dealing with minor issues
20:48:29 <moray> yay [I'm not completely convinced we need such a policy, but we discussed that long enough to persuade me that trying to block it is worse than having it]
20:48:48 <Ganneff> this might have been a topic at a different conf, but heck, why should we run blindly behind them?
20:48:49 <Sledge> yay
20:48:50 <gwolf> yay [same remark as moray]
20:48:53 * Sledge nods moray
20:48:56 <Ganneff> just because its good for others doesnt mean it is for us
20:49:11 <gwolf> it won't hurt. And it has made us spill too many bytes already
20:49:21 <Sledge> Ganneff: it will happen, and may already *have* happened but we just don't know
20:49:27 <Ganneff> it does hurt
20:49:38 <DrDub> yay
20:49:39 <fil> I, being an unconstitutional brit, think that this sort of thing shoukd not be written down, but should be assumed, so I'd go for "nay", just
20:49:44 * h01ger has heard "it" has happened at debconf 2-10
20:49:51 <Sledge> and "common" sense isn't unfortunately
20:49:57 <darst> I volunteer to babysit the policy... anyone want to join me ?
20:50:08 <Ganneff> h01ger: so, what did happen?
20:50:13 <gwolf> . o O (who will babysit the babysitters?)
20:50:18 <darst> and then it will not be anyone opposed's job to deal with it
20:50:18 <Ganneff> (people hugged me. i want an anti-hug policy, damnit)
20:50:30 <h01ger> Ganneff, harrassment
20:50:35 <darst> and will hand if off when people want to
20:50:37 <Ganneff> h01ger: hugging is worse
20:50:38 <h01ger> Ganneff, stop ridiculing
20:50:41 <fil> Sledge: I'd say it already happened:  Asuffield DC5 -- would this policy have helped?
20:50:50 * h01ger hugs Ganneff and sends kisses on the way
20:51:03 <AbsintheSyringe> I don't mind hugs either :P
20:51:13 <Ganneff> h01ger: and off a mail would go if this damn alias would be there already.
20:51:16 <darst> #agreed (with some abstentions) a-h@dc.o to debian alias for now, darst can babysit policy for now
20:51:21 <darst> let's move on
20:51:23 <h01ger> Ganneff, use the debian.org oen
20:51:24 <Ganneff> could you do it over in #debian-* please? :)
20:51:27 <darst> and people can oppose on list
20:51:37 <darst> #topic DC12 / delegate decision stuff
20:51:44 <darst> I think this should be discussed later
20:51:55 <darst> but moray would like comments on the list
20:52:02 <moray> can I just poke people to respond on the 'debconf discussion' points?
20:52:09 <moray> otherwise I'll take your silence as consent :p
20:52:09 <darst> yeah
20:52:19 <moray> and I genuinely want some feedback there
20:52:20 <gwolf> darst: we should (possibly on list, but soon) start talking about deadlines and meetings for the DC12 stuff
20:52:25 <darst> #info moray will take silence as consent on debconf discussion points
20:52:32 <Ganneff> im happy to help with dc12 foo
20:52:34 <darst> #info but it *needs* to be decided soon
20:52:35 <Ganneff> need to catch up with list
20:52:38 <Ganneff> this week, i hope
20:52:41 <moray> Ganneff: great
20:52:47 <DrDub> moray: I'd love to give you feedback, but the emails are HUGE
20:52:57 <Ganneff> (weeks of no pc make mailinglists grow)
20:53:00 <DrDub> moray: never get pass the first two pages
20:53:03 * h01ger promises he will try to read+reply to the mails on the list in the next 4 weeks :/ sorry, etoobusy, but i'll try. i agree its very important
20:53:10 <DrDub> moray: so, that's my silly feedback. Sorry.
20:53:12 <darst> #topic Next meeting / any other business
20:53:27 <h01ger> darst, i disagree
20:53:32 <moray> DrDub: not everything fits into 140 characters
20:53:37 <Ganneff> 8 februar would be next meet?
20:53:38 <AbsintheSyringe> we'll need a meeting after our next govt. meeting
20:53:38 <h01ger> with it *needs* to be decided soon
20:53:40 <darst> h01ger: ?
20:53:45 <AbsintheSyringe> I'm going to schedule this meeting tomorrow most prolly
20:53:48 <darst> ah
20:53:50 <darst> yeah
20:53:51 <moray> DrDub: (I think I tried to split the big policy ones from smaller points, though)
20:53:53 <gwolf> On AOB: When should we aim to start working on the academic stuff?
20:53:54 <AbsintheSyringe> at least when it comes to local team
20:54:07 <h01ger> it should be, yes. but having this defined properly is very important and should we only come up with the dc12 venua at dc11, so be it, i'd say
20:54:14 <AbsintheSyringe> but we need global team assistance, in issues we might encounter
20:54:19 <darst> a) next organizational meeting: next week or in two weeks
20:54:20 <moray> DrDub: but -- don't feel you need to read every word to respond, anyway
20:54:25 <AbsintheSyringe> 2 weeks
20:54:26 <darst> b) next business meeting in <when> ?
20:54:41 <Ganneff> darst: 4weeks for the regular ones
20:54:44 <darst> #info note that we don't necessarily need to decide DC12 soon
20:54:47 <Ganneff> and added one for the AbsintheSyringe foo stuff
20:54:48 <h01ger> whats business meeting here?
20:54:54 <Ganneff> regular i guess
20:55:08 <AbsintheSyringe> foo stuff?
20:55:11 <darst> organizational meeting would just talk about who does what, not about how that stuff happens
20:55:12 <DrDub> moray: yes, I'm part of a disappearing bid so I should care more.
20:55:18 <moray> we can start the DC12 process anyway soon anyway, the start doesn't need any new agreement I think
20:55:23 <Ganneff> AbsintheSyringe: whatever you have after your next presidental shoe licking :)
20:55:30 <vedran_omeragic> :)
20:55:41 <AbsintheSyringe> Ganneff, hah! :)
20:55:41 <darst> gwolf: for academic stuff, I would say "find out who does it [org meeting], then prod them on timeline"
20:55:54 <h01ger> moray, yeah. kinda :)
20:56:19 <darst> is next week too soon for organizatinal meeting ?
20:56:22 <flaggy> moray: dc12 process has sort of started, hasn't it? Both candidates seem to be reporting stuff.
20:56:30 <Ganneff> darst: ay
20:56:37 <h01ger> darst, yes
20:56:38 <Ganneff> darst: make it 2 weeks
20:56:42 <darst> (I can run it, lots on /Teams to fill out)
20:56:45 <gwolf> flaggy: yes, they are active.
20:56:46 <moray> flaggy: right, I mean start scheduling meetings for it, actively ask the bids more questions, etc.
20:56:53 <darst> two weeks for organizational meeting
20:57:00 <h01ger> flaggy, then it has started half a year ago or earlier
20:57:02 <moray> flaggy: I realise that the process actually 'started' a year or two ago already :)
20:57:05 <darst> should we put a time for another meeting after that one ?
20:57:16 <flaggy> h01ger: right
20:57:33 <Ganneff> darst: a regular one 4 weeks from now? (regular as in like today)
20:57:36 <darst> #agreed Organizational meeting (DC11/Teams list) meeting in two weeks
20:57:39 <moray> normally we'd be 4-weeks for DCN meetings at this stage
20:57:45 <gwolf> flaggy: They started long ago, but both teams I know of have recently reported activity
20:57:52 <Ganneff> two weeks is the 25th then
20:57:57 <darst> #agreed and regular meeting in four weeks probably
20:58:09 <darst> I can send time polls
20:58:14 <DrDub> great
20:58:15 <h01ger> 4 weeks til fosdem! \o/
20:58:16 <Ganneff> darst: nah
20:58:17 <flaggy> should those dates be set for the next meeting?
20:58:18 <darst> do people object to this sme time two tuesdays from now ?
20:58:19 <Ganneff> take same as now
20:58:28 <moray> darst: same time until there's an actual known issue
20:58:35 <Ganneff> yes. dont have to many pools
20:58:38 <Ganneff> polls
20:58:45 <darst> #topic Same time (tuesdays 20:00 UTC) for the time being
20:58:49 <Ganneff> keep it simple. makes it nicer in automated calendar foo :)
20:58:49 <darst> oops
20:58:50 <moray> darst: the benefit from changing may otherwise be outweighed by more people getting confused
20:58:54 <darst> #agreed Same time (tuesdays 20:00 UTC) for the time being
20:59:00 <darst> #topic any other business ?
20:59:04 <darst> let us end!
20:59:10 <DrDub> wait
20:59:13 <darst> yes?
20:59:23 <DrDub> any objectionsa bout moving the DC10 report to alioth?
20:59:28 <DrDub> Ganneff: ?
20:59:36 <moray> it should be with the other reports
20:59:43 <Ganneff> yeah. keep it together
20:59:46 <DrDub> right now is hosted in svn.d.o
20:59:49 <DrDub> good
20:59:50 <DrDub> that's it
20:59:58 <Ganneff> just get me list of users when you want more.
21:00:11 <h01ger> DrDub, if you had asked about all reports ;)
21:00:19 <moray> h01ger: sure, that's different :)
21:00:19 <DrDub> ah, nah. I'm movin it to alioth
21:00:30 <Ganneff> ?
21:00:33 <AbsintheSyringe> vedran_omeragic, we have problem with permissions as well right?
21:00:33 <DrDub> Ganneff: why you want it on svn.d.o?
21:00:36 <AbsintheSyringe> with the website
21:00:43 * h01ger thinks debconf.org repos are fine for financial and personal data, but for the rest, alioth is better
21:00:48 <Ganneff> DrDub: we want it where all the others are.
21:00:56 <Ganneff> DrDub: so, if you move all of em (please, with history), fine
21:00:57 <moray> debconf-reports
21:01:09 <Ganneff> moray: new alioth repo?
21:01:16 <vedran_omeragic> not permissions, but rather time it takes for svn to be updated... not really sure how it works
21:01:18 <Ganneff> not good
21:01:19 <DrDub> Ganneff: I'll move the later version and put a readme pointing to the history
21:01:21 <darst> question here is: start DC10 report in debconf-data, since fewer peopel have to ask for permission there
21:01:26 <h01ger> darst, thanks for chairing the meeting (and all the rest! :)
21:01:28 <moray> Ganneff: I mean, it should be in the existing debconf-reports
21:01:33 <Ganneff> with svn..dc.o we have reports built automagically on commit too
21:01:36 <h01ger> ^^to whom it may apply :)
21:01:37 <moray> Ganneff: wherever that happens to live, at any given time
21:01:41 <Ganneff> (well, had, with the latex ones)
21:01:59 <Ganneff> DrDub: now thats worse than just using svn.dc.o
21:02:00 <DrDub> not something imporrtant really, we need more help on that
21:02:09 <moray> Ganneff: but we shouldn't just move one year out of its relevant repository, if we want to move they should all move, with history, like you say
21:02:20 <DrDub> using svn.d.o is holding us up
21:02:23 <Ganneff> moray: yeah. DrDub wants to do it different.
21:02:26 * gwolf has to go - Thanks for a short meeting!
21:02:27 <gwolf> o/
21:02:35 <h01ger> \o
21:02:36 <Ganneff> DrDub: yeah, cos nobody ever told about accounts to add or so...
21:02:38 <vedran_omeragic> anywho, I recently uploaded a small php script to http://debconf11.debconf.org/maps.php, but I can't seem to be able to access it? is there a reason for this?
21:02:49 <Ganneff> vedran_omeragic: yes. no php
21:02:55 <Ganneff> vedran_omeragic: but we can do that out of meeting
21:02:56 <vedran_omeragic> mind if I ask why?
21:03:02 <darst> so
21:03:03 <DrDub> vedran_omeragic: please not now
21:03:03 <Ganneff> cos we have no php.
21:03:10 <vedran_omeragic> DrDub, ok
21:03:11 <moray> darst: I think we finished?
21:03:16 <darst> I think so
21:03:21 <DrDub> I want to move this to move on
21:03:28 <darst> what was the conclusion on reports ?
21:03:33 <Ganneff> not split them
21:03:34 <moray> they go in the existing degbconf-reports
21:03:35 <Ganneff> keep em together
21:03:36 <moray> -g
21:03:38 <DrDub> Ganneff: please reply to my e-mail on the list
21:03:47 <Ganneff> and so we use svn.dc.o unless someone moves all of em plus history
21:03:53 <DrDub> moray: it makes no sense to have the reports in tha different SVN!
21:04:01 <darst> #info reports stay together (for now)
21:04:02 <Ganneff> DrDub: ill try to get through to the list mails this week
21:04:05 <darst> ending meeting...
21:04:10 <DrDub> Ganneff: I'll move the current version and point to the history
21:04:15 <h01ger> ah. we're still in the meeting
21:04:15 <darst> #endmeeting