On 09/21/2014 10:15 AM, Steve McIntyre wrote: > > I'll suggest something contrary here - I *don't* think we should even > try. DebConf is *not* a typical academic conference where people are > presenting state-of-the-art research to a very wide community who are > otherwise disinterested. It's a meetup for Debian people to share what > they've been doing and generate ideas together for future stuff. We > already get slides and stuff for most of our talks. I'm trying to > encourage other people to post write-ups of their sessions to -devel > etc. later, which I think is much more valuable than a dead > "proceedings" document which is outside the normal Debian workflow.
I have to agree. There was a time when "proceedings" were a common feature of FLOSS conferences, but these conferences all rejected the proceedings model around the same time DebConf did, in favor of promoting a more participatory and conversational model. We need to be very conscious of the outcomes we're trying to achieve with DebConf. At its core, DebConf has a sustaining function for the heart of the Debian community. It's a place where we gather, reconnect, and get inspired for a new year of involvement. A set of talks that dryly recite papers prepared months before the event is not a good fit for DebConf, it's not what we need as a community. Allison _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
