[Debconf-team] penta is ready for the CfP for debconf 10
hey folks-- a few of us (Hydroxide, Clint, edrz, MrBeige, and myself) stayed after the meeting today and sorted out some minor pentabarf updates to address the issues raised by the dc10 CfP. in particular: * we removed all mention of tracks by removing the two existing tracks (it had offered "debconf" and "debcamp" as the track options, which don't match what we're thinking of as "tracks") and patching penta to not display a selectbox for "track" if no tracks are available. As we settle on specific tracks, we can start to take advantage of penta's track functionality, but for now we'll leave it unused. We don't think there is any need for people to submit proposals for debcamp through penta, so we lose nothing by just yanking that choice for now. * we normalized the set of "event types" with the ideas that are in the CfP. So i think penta is ready to go for the CfP. If you have any feedback on how penta could be improved to be less confusing for people to use for submitting proposals, please pipe up -- let's make it as smooth a process as possible. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] update about tracks
Hey folks-- At the local team meeting yesterday, we talked a bit about the idea of grouping some of the debconf talks (and other events) into thematically-focused tracks [0]. To follow through with this, we'll need coordinators for every track we run. Hans and i came up with the following 6 suggestions for tracks (they don't all need to happen, and other suggestsions are welcome): Media and Arts and Debian Debian Enterprise (Integration with Other Systems) System Administration within the Debian Project Trends and Tools for Debian Packaging Math and Science and Debian Outreach (Debian Everywhere!) I'm about to mail some potential track coordinators for each track to see if they are interested in pulling something together. I'm not listing them here, because i haven't checked in with them yet and i don't want to call anyone out. If you have suggestions for other tracks, or for someone who would make a good track coordinator (or if you want to coordinate a track yourself), please let me or the list know. The invitations/incitements that i'll be sending will be variants on the following: - Hi $potential, Are you interested in seeing more discussion at debconf about $topic? We were thinking you'd have a good perspective on $topic, and wanted to know if you'd be interested in coordinating a track for debconf 10 this summer. Tracks are a new idea for debconf as of DC10. A track would thematically group a consecutive set of debconf events (talks, panels, etc) to encourage a better understanding of a broader theme. For this to work, we'd like a knowledgable person about a given theme to act as a track coordinator. A coordinator would have a chance to set the tone and scope for the track, schedule events, assemble panels or debates, introduce speakers, and report back at the end of debconf to the larger gathering. We also hope that a coordinator could identify potential good work being done in their area, encourage people to submit relevant events for debconf, and shepherd talks in their track through the submission process. Are you interested in coordinating a track on $topic? Or do you have a suggestion for someone else who might do a good job on it? You can reach me and other members of the talks team privately at ta...@debconf.org, or feel free to contact the whole debconf team (publicly) at debconf-team@lists.debconf.org --dkg - Just wanted to report back to the whole debconf team on the progress on this front. If we get no takers for track coordinators before the talk submission deadline (very soon!) we might consider abandoning the tracks idea for this year :/ --dkg [0] http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/TalkGlossary signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] update about tracks
On 04/26/2010 03:35 PM, Michael Banck wrote: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 11:38:00AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> Just wanted to report back to the whole debconf team on the progress on >> this front. If we get no takers for track coordinators before the talk >> submission deadline (very soon!) we might consider abandoning the tracks >> idea for this year :/ > > Well, maybe tracks could be exempt from that deadline, or the deadline > be extended for track-specific submissions. Would that be possible? i suspect that the deadline isn't going to be as hard as it sounded, and as far as i'm concerned: if there is a good-looking track under development, with a solid coordinator bottom-lining it, and that coordinator says "hey, this proposal is coming in after-deadline, but i really think it would fit in my track well", i'd be inclined to honor that proposal. That said, the later it gets, the more difficult it gets to change schedules around, so i wouldn't want this to encourage people to slack on proposal submissions just because they think they can squeeze things through on a track basis. --dkg PS Michael, your name has been floated as someone who might be a good math/science track coordinator, esp. seeing your debian science round table proposal. Have you considered that role? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Fwd: Any chance I could gain access to something other than the all events page?
hey debconf folks-- Sam Hartman had the attached request; he's doing good work putting together a debian enterprise track. is there a way we can get him an interface to the talks that would be more convenient for him? --dkg --- Begin Message --- The only page I can use to look at event submissions other than my own is the all events page. It's really clunky: you can't skim events or skip over a page of events you don't care about. An interface where I could clik on a link and look at the info for an event would be useful. I'm not sure if such exists, although I'm reasonably sure that something more than the all events page does exist. I don't know if I could be given somewhat more access without being given access that made the talks team feel umcomfortable. --Sam --- End Message --- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] casting a wider net for the talks team
hey folks-- Right now, as far as i know, the talks team for debconf 10 consists of 5 people, all of whom are (more or less) local to NYC: me, micah, hans, kris, and biella. We welcome more members! Members of the talks team all receive copies of mail sent to the alias, which we are using for talks- and tracks-related communications which people do not want public. I'm encouraging people who are ok with public discussion to send their talks- and tracks-related correspondence directly to this list, . The current members of the talks team are listed at: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Teams It currently says "+ others", an ambiguity i plan to remove shortly. If you want to help out the talks team, please add yourself to the list on the wiki, reply here, and we'll get you on the talks@ alias. More info will come later about things like talks ranking/rating, the upcoming talks team "retreat", track coordinators, and so forth. happy hacking, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Tracks and Track Coordinators for Debconf 10
Hey Folks-- As you may know, we are trying to organize some thematic groupings of talks at debconf 10. We're calling these groupings "tracks". http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Tracks i put a call out on planet.debian.org recently asking for people to coordinate a track if they're interested [0]. And using the ta...@debconf.org alias, i also reached out to specific people and communities for some of the brainstormed track ideas, hoping to find good coordinators. While i didn't do this this as well as i should have (we should have started the tracks business much earlier, and i think i should have sent the tracks call to d-d-a, in retrospect), i'm happy to say it's panning out well. The debian community is awesome. So we now have the following prospective tracks underway, with the associated coordinators: * Debian Integration in the Enterprise -- Sam Hartman * Mathematics and Science in Debian -- Michael Banck * Debian Community Outreach -- Andy Oram and Frank B. Brokken * Java in Debian -- Pablo Duboue This is all listed at http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Tracks I hope i haven't missed anything that's already come in, and there is still room for new tracks, if someone steps up soon to volunteer as a coordinator. Coordinators, if i've mis-stated your affiliation, or you want to change the name of the track, or whatever, feel free to edit that wiki page, and to discuss it here on debconf-t...@lists.debconf.org. If you have concerns about the talks or the tracks that you think need to be addressed privately with the talks team, you can use the ta...@debconf.org alias. Since this is debian, we prefer public communication if possible :) Inclusion of any given track in debconf 10 is still contingent on there being enough good submissions for the track, and on scheduling concerns, of course. I'm very excited about the work that has been submitted so far, and i look forward to seeing the schedule come together. Regards, --dkg "the track wrangler" [0] https://www.debian-administration.org/users/dkg/weblog/61 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] "Talks Selection Retreat Day" - Tues, May 4th, tentative
[ please respect Followup-To: debconf-team@lists.debconf.org -- everyone interested in talks should be subscribed on that list already, and talks selection is not local business ] On 04/30/2010 03:03 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > Ok folks, its time for the big "Talks Selection Day" According to the > doodle poll, its looking like the evening of Tuesday, May 4th is the > big day. I suggest starting at 5pm so we don't have to go super late. Hrm, these notes here suggest that the retreat happens *after* the global feedback: http://meetbot.debian.net/debconf-team/2010/debconf-team.2010-03-31-20.00.html But the doodle poll suggests that the order is the other way around. I don't mind meeting in person on May 4th to talk about the submissions and figure out workflow (in fact, i think we need to do a quite a bit of work to figure that out), but i'm a bit concerned that we make it clear this isn't the "retreat" that the poll claims it to be. I'm also concerned that the 4th is so close to the submission deadline, and there has been such publicly acknowledged "squishiness" of the deadline, that we run the risk of missing out on discussing some not-insignificant fraction of submissions by being so early with it. what do other folks think? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Debian Java track at DebConf 10
Hi Pablo-- On 04/30/2010 02:40 PM, Pablo Duboue wrote: > Question for DebConf-Team: if we get Rich Hickey to give a talk, does he need > to go through the regular talk submission process? (We clearly won't get him > to submit before the talk deadline ;-) What is the process you envision for > these type of situations? How much wiggling room do you see for the track > themselves to allocate spots? > > I guess a possible alternative is to have Brian sign up for a slot "a > conversation with Rich Hickey, author of Clojure" and then either have him > give a talk or have somebody (could be Brian, could be Ramakrishnan, could be > a-yet-to-be-discovered-journalist-among-us) to conduct some sort of > "interview" on stage. What do you think? I'm with Jimmy that this is a great way to do it. I think should be a bit of wiggle room for good proposals that come in under the aegis of an active Track Coordinator. But yes, there still does need to be some kind of proposal for the talks team to understand what the topic is (some of us *ahem* might have never heard of Rich Hickey or Clojure before today, for example). Btw, i disagree with saying something is "in a sense a keynote". We have explicitly avoided this term for good reason, i think, and I don't want us to give the impression that we're doing mini-keynotes, "sort-of" keynotes, or any other kind of keynotes. Everyone presenting is presenting material that is interesting and relevant to debian. If debian Java folks are excited about Clojure, that's great (and, i think, sufficient without the "keynote" label). Thanks for doing this work and organizing what sounds like a bunch of interesting proposals. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] debian community outreach track
hi Andy and Frank-- I notice that someone anonymous has edited the description of the debian community outreach track here: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Tracks I'm hoping it was one of you two ;) I'm happy to see active work on the track! I have two concerns, though: (a) it seems to refer to "the panel" as though that were the same thing as the track. There could very well be a panel which is proposed as part of the track, but a track should have multiple events. (b) i haven't yet seen a collection of other events for the track (though i'm assuming Frank's proposal would also be in this track), so i don't have a sense of how it's coming together. If you have a chance, take a look at Pablo Duboue's page for the Java track: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/TrackJava If we could start assembling something like this for the community outreach track, that would be great. Thanks for your work on this. I think the focus of this track is important, and i'm excited to try to highlight this sort of ongoing work at debconf. Regards, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] debian enterprise track status
Hi Sam-- Thanks for all the work you've been doing soliciting and vetting talks for the Enterprise track for DebConf 10. For the parts of that work which you feel are OK being public, it would be helpful if there was a way that interested people (from the talks team and elsewhere) could get a quick overview of the situation for this track. Since (as you've identified) penta doesn't seem to meet our needs here yet, would you be ok with putting together something similar to what Pablo Duboue has done for the Java track? http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/TrackJava It would just be a simple page of public status (doesn't need to be on the wiki if you'd rather host it yourself). If you have any questions or suggestions about the process that can be public, please send them to debconf-t...@lists.debconf.org. Private concerns can be raised with the talks teak directly at ta...@debconf.org. Thanks again for your organizing work. I'm looking forward to seeing this important aspect of debian well-represented at dc10. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Coordinating a track on Media and Art and Debian at debconf 10?
Hi Reinhard and the rest of the debian multimedia folks-- On 05/01/2010 02:41 PM, Reinhard Tartler wrote: > On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 20:21:49 (CEST), Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > >> Hi IOhannes, Paul, and interested folk on the debian multimedia >> packaging team, > > Hey there! > >> Are you interested in seeing lively discussion at debconf about >> multimedia and arts and debian? Some of you have already submitted >> events or talks, and we wanted to know if any of you would be interested >> in coordinating a track for debconf 10 this summer about the work going >> on in this area. >> >> Tracks are a new idea for debconf as of DC10. A track would >> thematically group a consecutive set of debconf events (talks, panels, >> etc) to encourage a better understanding of a broader theme. For this >> to work, we'd like a knowledgable person about a given theme to act as >> a track coordinator. >> >> A coordinator would have a chance to set the tone and scope for the >> track, schedule events, assemble panels or debates, introduce >> speakers, and report back at the end of debconf to the larger >> gathering. We also hope that a coordinator could identify potential >> good work being done in their area, encourage people to submit >> relevant events for debconf, and shepherd talks in their track through >> the submission process. >> >> So, are you interested in coordinating a track on media and art and >> debian for DC10? Or do you have a suggestion for someone else who might >> do a good job on it? You can reach me and other members of the talks >> team privately at ta...@debconf.org, or feel free to contact the whole >> debconf team (publicly) at debconf-t...@lists.debconf.org. > > I'm very interested in having such an multimedia track. However, I'm not > sure if I have the required experience to drive such an track. Moreover, > I'm already hard at my time limit I can devote to debian tasks, and I'm > not sure how much time this task requires, I'd very much prefer to > assist rather than to drive such an track all alone. In any case, > please keep me in the loop about this efford! Thanks for your feedback! (cc'ing debconf-team here, which is the public place for talks discussion, since this message already went out to another public list, pkg-multimedia-maintainers) Unfortunately, no one has stepped up to act as a coordinator for this track yet. There will still be arts and media presentations at debconf, but they'll be evaluated as independent proposals (not in a track) if no one volunteers to act as track coordinator for the Media and Art track soon. Please let debconf-t...@lists.debian.org know if you want to volunteer (or you can contact ta...@debconf.org privately if you have questions or concerns that you don't want to be public). I'd love to see a concerted focus on debian in art and media at DebConf 10, personally, and i hope that someone will step up! Regards, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Coordinating a track on Media and Art and Debian at debconf 10?
Hi Adrian-- On 05/01/2010 09:03 PM, Adrian Knoth wrote: > I'm not sure what "track coordinator" means, but I think I could help a > bit. If it's about being session chair, planning talks or stuff like > this, I'd be in. thanks! we'd love to have you working on this if you're up for it. > Could you please elaborate or point me to some documentation what my > tasks would be? Please see the Tracks-related information here: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/TalkGlossary And look at the other tracks here: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Tracks Basically, we'd need you to solicit Arts/Media-related proposals from people who are doing interesting work, maybe pull together people on a panel/debate/discussion or two, and figure out ordering and a coherent over-arching theme for the track. You might want to look at the "All Events" page on https://penta.debconf.org/ to see what arts-related proposals have been submitted already, since we're past the official proposal submission deadline. Good communications with the talks and scheduling teams (here on this list is fine) will also be critical so that when we're deciding what proposals to accept and how to schedule them we can make sure the track comes together. (we're doing this for the first time this year, so any insight you have to the process, or how it *should* work would be welcome as well). Additionally, during debconf, we hope that the track coordinator will stay on top of the logistics of the track, introduce presenters, keep things moving and well-paced, and report back to the larger group at the end of the conference. Pablo and Michael have started to document what they're pulling together on individual track pages (Java and Math/Science, respectively). Have a look at their work to understand what they've done, and feel free to ask questions here too. > I plan to attend DebCamp, so there should also be some on-site time to > coordinate the track. Hopefully, most of the pre-debconf track coordinating work will be done by the time debcamp starts (though there will of course be exceptions). Thanks for stepping up for this! If you decide you want to go ahead with it, please modify the Tracks page with your information, and start documenting what you've pulled together. Regards, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] "Talks Selection Retreat Day" - Tues, May 4th, tentative
On 05/03/2010 05:22 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > The key idea of the retreat is for local people to get together to be > able to talk about the apps and then we'll enter our ratings into > penta. Then all who want to contribute on penta can do so, and we'll > wait for all that. But it seems that no one is following thru on this > retreat, so it might be that we're all just doing it via penta. One reason that we're in disarray is that two of the 5 local talks team folks had recent schedule changes that make this Tuesday impractical for them. If we do this all via penta, i'm going to need a bit of training or documentation (and maybe some elevated privileges?) to know how to indicate my preferences in penta itself. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] casting a wider net for the talks team
On 04/30/2010 02:33 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > The current members of the talks team are listed at: > > http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Teams > > It currently says "+ others", an ambiguity i plan to remove shortly. If > you want to help out the talks team, please add yourself to the list on > the wiki, reply here, and we'll get you on the talks@ alias. I've just removed "+ others". Please add yourself to the talks team if you want to participate in talks selection! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] "Talks Selection Retreat Day" - Tues, May 4th, tentative
On 05/03/2010 05:53 PM, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote: > That's quite easy to do; I have an email from Joerg Jaspert to last year's > talks team (which I was on) explaining how the software works If this could be posted publicly someplace (a web page?) that'd be great! Is there any reason this needs to be private? > and I can grant > the necessary access privileges in penta. Send me an email with the list of > everyone on the talks team, and I'll update the privs; Currently, http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Teams lists micah, biella, hans, myself, and kris. My recent call for widening the reach of the talks team didn't raise any non-local folks, unfortunately. If those who are currently listed could be granted the appropriate privileges, we can add other people as they step up. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Tracks and Track Coordinators for Debconf 10
Hi Anthony-- Sorry, i just got this message right now (not sure why, but maybe the debconf-team queue was backlogged?) On 04/30/2010 05:32 PM, Anthony Towns wrote: > So there are two tracks I think would be really interesting: > > * Debian on mobile devices (phones, slates, netbooks) > * Debian and Wall Street (financial industry and related) yes, these sound interesting to me too. > I kind of feel like there ought to be better people for both tracks > (my smartphone runs S60, not Linux; and Brisbane's almost as far away > from Wall St as you can get), but I could possibly be convinced > otherwise... We'd need someone to step up and coordinate these tracks, and it's looking pretty late in the game for DC10. If you have concrete proposals of people who might coordinate in a rush, that'd be great. Or if you want to pick one of the above and see what you can come up with, that would be good too. If you (or anyone else) decide you want to be a track coordinator for one of these, please edit http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Tracks, make a wiki page for the proposed track, and start documenting the relevant proposals, scheduling plans, and other concerns you think are relvant. Thanks for the suggestions, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] casting a wider net for the talks team
On 05/04/2010 12:44 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote: > I can help with this. I was in the talks team 2 years ago, and I guess it is > same rating system? great, thanks! welcome to the talks team. i have never done this before, but i assume it's the same rating system used in previous years. Richard just posted info about the process here: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Pentabarf but i haven't had time to read it yet. Would you mind adding yourself to the talks team list? http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Teams Thanks again for volunteering! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] broken links and unauthenticated content in https://penta.debconf.org/
hey debconf folks-- Just doing some web site triage on https://penta.debconf.org/, and found three problems: 0) the X.509 certificate chain was mis-ordered (it is supposed to be , but was being served as ). Ganneff just fixed this. Thanks, Ganneff! 1) the "DebConf resources" link on the front page points to https://penta.debconf.org/resources.shtml, which is a 404 Not Found. Maybe it's supposed to be https://www.debconf.org/resources.shtml ? 2) https://penta.debconf.org/ contains a bunch of images served in the clear from http://www.debconf.org/. This is considered a data leak by most browsers, and they will usually show a "broken lock" icon. Standard practices for https web sites would have all the embedded content served via https instead of http. The simplest way to "fix" the broken lock would probably be to replace all those img src's with https:// instead of http:// (since www.debconf.org is also offered via https). I don't think i have access to fix these things myself, or i would just do it. Can someone else take care of them? Thanks, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] broken links and unauthenticated content in https://penta.debconf.org/
On 05/05/2010 06:11 AM, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Mittwoch, 5. Mai 2010, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> 1) the "DebConf resources" link on the front page points to >> https://penta.debconf.org/resources.shtml, which is a 404 Not Found. >> Maybe it's supposed to be https://www.debconf.org/resources.shtml ? > > fixed wow, that was fast, thanks! >> 2) https://penta.debconf.org/ contains a bunch of images served in the >> clear from http://www.debconf.org/. This is considered a data leak by >> most browsers, and they will usually show a "broken lock" icon. >> >> Standard practices for https web sites would have all the embedded >> content served via https instead of http. The simplest way to "fix" the >> broken lock would probably be to replace all those img src's with >> https:// instead of http:// (since www.debconf.org is also offered via >> https). > > The problem is in the stylesheet hrm. the stylesheet itself is loaded from http://www.debconf.org/, which would cause a "broken lock", and there are at least two img elements on that page (the navigation icons to the upper-right of the content area) that are src'ed from http://www.debconf.org. > and doesnt show up in konqueror, so I left > this as it is, at least for now. This might indicate a bug in konqueror, then. It should not represent web sites that pull data over cleartext connections as having been fetched via an encrypted channel. I'll look into it. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Fwd: Talks team access now in place
hi debconf folks-- Hydroxide meant to send the attached announcement to the whole team so that we all know who has access to what capabilities. I'm re-sending it on his behalf Please speak up if you think you should have access which has not been granted. --dkg --- Begin Message --- Hi, I just gave the DC10 talks team "reviewer" access in penta, which is what you need to review talks, if they didn't already had it. I got the list from the DebConf10/Teams wiki page, but to avoid confusion in case of wiki changes, the list I referred to is: "biella, micah, _hc, dkg, kris, azeem, ana, gwolf" Some of those people already had other access such as "committee" (rating travel sponsorship requests), "scheduler" (scheduling talks), or even full-blown admin access (hi gwolf). I didn't touch those. Now everyone on the team should be able to do talks rating, which you've already conveniently documented here: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Pentabarf Feel free to contact me, ad...@debconf.org, or gwolf (see above about his penta admin status) if other access is needed. - Jimmy Kaplowitz ji...@debconf.org --- End Message --- signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] talks team questions
hey folks-- I'm hoping to give a reportback from the talks team later this weekend, as i offered in the meeting today. I also want to reiterate a call for help if anyone else wants to review talks. If you can even review a dozen talks, please reply here and we'll try to get you reviewer privs. In addition to trying to touch base with my fellow talks team members, i'm realizing i have a few questions myself about what is needed from us. I've never done this work before, so i'd be curious to know what more experienced people think here: 0) of the three axes of review, one of them "Actuality" seems to require that we know the capabilities of the proposer. In many cases, i have no idea if the proposer is actually capable of running the proposed talk. What should i do with "Actuality" in this case? 1) in this process, what is the relationship between reviewing talks, scheduling/placing talks, and accepting talks? that is, I'd love to tell people "your talk is accepted", but i don't want to do that when i don't know if we can accomodate them. Can i get some feedback from the venue folks about how to coordinate this? Thanks for any ideas or feedback y'all have. I'd be happy to learn from past experience but i don't have much to draw from myself. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] penta ranking calculation metrics
I'm concerned that the rating metric is wrong in penta when reviewers leave one of the three categories in a "don't know" state. for example, if i say "+" for all three categories (relevance, actuality, acceptance), the score will be 50. (50 + 50 + 50)/3 if i say "+" for relevance and acceptance, but "0", the score shows 37. This seems slightly wrong -- i'd have expected 33. but meh, not a very big deal. A bigger deal is if i say "+" for relevance and acceptance, but leave actuality as unspecified (because i don't know anything about the presenter), the score also drops to 37. I'd have expected it to stay at 50: (50 + 50)/2 In particular, i'm proposing that unspecified axes should be removed from both the numerator and the denominator, rather than just being treated as a 0 in the numerator. Any thoughts on this? Am i misunderstanding something? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] talks team reportback
hey debconf folks-- This is my followup report on the talks team status for debconf 10. The talks review and acceptance process is late, but we're working on it. By this coming Wednesday, we expect to have each submission reviewed by at least two people, hopefully more. Those who are local will try to meet in person on Wednesday (2010-05-24) at 7pm NYC time (23:00 UTC) to talk through the remaining steps, and try to make sure we have a shared sense of what's happening and what else needs to happen. We will conduct this meeting on irc at #debconf-team or a side-channel if #debconf-team is otherwise busy (and announce the side-channel on #debconf-team, of course). Physical location for the local portion of the meeting is being discussed privately on ta...@debconf.org so people can offer locations without publicly archiving them. As my previous mail noted, it's still not clear to me how the talks team is supposed to make the talk acceptance decisions without feedback from the venue folks about how many room-hours we actually have at our disposal. Any clarifications on this by more experienced folks would be welcome. I'll follow up after Wednesday's meeting to clarify what (if any) next steps we have. I welcome any questions and feedback. Apologies for our lateness. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Fwd: number of talks to be accepted?
Hi folks--
Without concrete figures from the venue side of things yet, the talks
team is looking to officially approve around 78 talks. Ana put together
a good back-of-the-envelope guess at what seems likely to be feasible,
which you can see in the attached e-mails.
Any other perspectives on the reasonableness of this initial estimate?
And how might debian open day ("debian day"? my terminology is fuzzy)
factor into this?
Any thoughts about the idea of a daily all-group event (well, all-group
might be pushing it, but at least whoever's awake and attending talks)?
--dkg
--- Begin Message ---
Hola,
Looking at the number of submissions we got and how much talks we should
accept, I have done a small estimate.
The conference last 7 days but we do not have talks one day (daytrip),
I do not know how many talk rooms we'll have but I assume a couple of them.
Last year we have a maximum of 7 events per room (one hour per event).
This give us:
6 days * 2 rooms * 7 events = 84 events.
Last year, we have a keynote event every day (first talk in the afternoon),
that means 6 talks less (78).
So what about accepting ~78 talks talks? We have currently 107 submissions,
but about 10 of them are not talk submission, they are social events that just
needs scheduling.
Finally, I hope we have at least a third room to schedule all the "last minute"
track. Also note I have not considered here the Debian Open Day (I have not
idea
about its status).
What do you think?
Ana
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Ana--
Thanks for doing this analysis! I think this touches on venue issues
too; would you mind if we took the discussion public to debconf-team@ ?
On 05/25/2010 02:15 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote:
> Looking at the number of submissions we got and how much talks we should
> accept, I have done a small estimate.
>
> The conference last 7 days but we do not have talks one day (daytrip),
> I do not know how many talk rooms we'll have but I assume a couple of them.
> Last year we have a maximum of 7 events per room (one hour per event).
> This give us:
>
> 6 days * 2 rooms * 7 events = 84 events.
this sounds like a reasonable estimate.
> Last year, we have a keynote event every day (first talk in the afternoon),
> that means 6 talks less (78).
we're not calling them keynotes this time around, but i like the
scheduling idea of trying to have a widely-targetted talk (in a bigger
room?) every day, or at least every other day. Seems like it might give
more cohesion to the conference.
> So what about accepting ~78 talks talks? We have currently 107 submissions,
> but about 10 of them are not talk submission, they are social events that just
> needs scheduling.
as long as the social events don't happen during the daytime window i'm
assuming we plan for talks, this makes sense.
> Finally, I hope we have at least a third room to schedule all the "last
> minute"
> track. Also note I have not considered here the Debian Open Day (I have not
> idea
> about its status).
i don't know about the Debian Open Day situation either. Anyone else?
Thanks again for the good estimates, Ana!
--dkg
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 04:46:38PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
>
> Thanks for doing this analysis! I think this touches on venue issues
> too; would you mind if we took the discussion public to debconf-team@ ?
Please, go ahead.
> > Last year, we have a keynote event every day (first talk in the afternoon),
> > that means 6 talks less (78).
>
> we're not calling them keynotes this time around, but i like the
> scheduling idea of trying to have a widely-targetted talk (in a bigger
> room?) every day, or at least every other day. Seems like it might give
> more cohesion to the conference.
>
I do not care too much about the name neither. But we already have falling
under this category at least "Bits from the DPL". And if organized, the
"Lightning Talks". BTW, is there any volunteer for this one?
> > So what about accepting ~78 talks talks? We have currently 107 submissions,
> > but about 10 of them are not talk submission, they are social events that
> > just
> > needs scheduling.
>
> as long as the social events don't happen during the daytime window i'm
> assuming we plan for talks, this makes sense.
We should find some way of marking the social events in penta.
At least the "group picture" will happen in the daytime, but it should not
need more than 30 min.
Ana
--- End Message ---
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Talks team meeting at 23:00 UTC
Hi debconf people-- This is a reminder that the dc10 talks team is meeting today on IRC (and local folks in person as well) at 23:00 UTC (7pm NYC time). We'll meet on #debconf-team -- if it is too noisy there or we're disturbing other organizers who don't want to hear about talks, we can move the meeting to #debconf-talks, but i'd prefer to meet in the standard public channel. I put a stab at an agenda online: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Meetings#talks_team_meeting_Wednesday_2010-05-026_23:00UTC__.287pm_NYC_time.29 Please edit as you see fit. Looking forward to discussing with you all, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] talks team followup: scheduling and plenaries
The talks team had a meeting on #debconf-team this evening. Thanks to everyone who showed up. meetbot summary (and links to logs) are here: http://meetbot.debian.net/debconf-team/2010/debconf-team.2010-05-26-23.07.html I wanted to raise two distinct issues with the broader debconf team from our meeting: Scheduling and Plenaries. 0) Scheduling The current understanding is that scheduling accepted talks is not explicitly the purview of the talks team (though members might well volunteer for that task) -- However, the only mention of scheduling on the Teams wiki page is in the talks team section. We currently have no one explicitly volunteering to do the dirty work of scheduling once talks are accepted. Is anyone interested in acting as Scheduler? Does anyone with experience from scheduling past debconfs have advice to offer? 1) Plenaries There was quite a bit of discussion about having a select few events scheduled with no other concurrent events. We are calling these "Plenaries" for the moment. If we decide we want to have them, we might run into a bit of a space issue, as the larger of our two talks rooms only seats 200 people. The video team can set up the smaller talk room as a spillover area with live video, though. Do we want to have Plenaries? If so, how often? One per day is the most anyone has proposed so far. It's not clear that anyone wants to do away with the concept entirely, though (e.g. zack's Bits from the DPL seems to have general support as a Plenary). Do other debconf organizers feel strongly about this? Thanks for your feedback, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team followup: scheduling and plenaries
On 05/27/2010 08:47 AM, Clint Adams wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 02:01:20AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> There was quite a bit of discussion about having a select few events >> scheduled with no other concurrent events. > > What are the criteria for these "select few"? I would assume the criteria would be something like a combination of: * relevance and interest to a broad swath of attendees * reasonable concision I also imagine selecting for events that cover conference-wide details (welcome, wrap-up/reportback, etc). What do you think the criteria should be? Or would you prefer no plenaries at all? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team followup: scheduling and plenaries
On 05/27/2010 11:01 AM, Clint Adams wrote: > On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 10:47:04AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> What do you think the criteria should be? Or would you prefer no >> plenaries at all? > > I don't think I can answer this because I'm not yet sure what the > point of them is. One potential advantage of having plenary talks might be a better sense of cohesion for attendees. However, we already have the day trip and the formal dinner as events which i expect will do some of that. And of course, no one is proposing required attendance or anything silly like that. The hacklab will still be open, and some people will no doubt be sleeping or eating elsewhere. Another advantage might be to communicate specific concerns to the broader group, for example if we have a wrap-up session with reportbacks from track coordinators, bosnia/DC11 exhortations, and RCBC victor announcements. Do you see any advantages to having plenaries? Any disadvantages? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] penta ranking calculation metrics
On 05/22/2010 06:41 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > I'm concerned that the rating metric is wrong in penta when reviewers > leave one of the three categories in a "don't know" state. [...] > Any thoughts on this? Am i misunderstanding something? OK, i've looked into this further. edrz pointed me toward the SQL that calculates the scores: sql/views/report/view_report_review.sql The old wiki page [0] description of the overall score was: >> The total rating is the average (arithmetic mean) of these three >> numbers. Of course, this isn't a perfect rating system, but that's why >> we don't use it directly. But that is untrue. I've updated the wiki page [0] to describe the actual calculation: >> We compute a talk's score in each category by taking the average >> (arithmetic mean) of all ratings of the talk in that category. A talk's >> total score is equal to (2*acceptance + actuality + relevance)/4. (so >> acceptance counts twice as much as the other categories). >> >> If no one has rated a talk in a given category (e.g. if everyone has >> left "actuality" unrated), that category's contribution to the total >> score is 0. I actually think this is a reasonable approach, i just didn't understand what it was doing. So i withdraw my earlier objection. To be clear, the nice features of this approach are: * the proportional contributions of the three categories to the overall score are independent of the number of ratings in each category. * if a category has no ratings at all, it is as though everyone rated it zero. If a category has one rating, that is the score used for that category. So if you don't know, you can let people who do know provide information without tainting their ratings. And if no one knows, then there is real ambivalence which is best represented for that category contributing 0 to the final score. * i like that acceptance is rated as much as relevance and actuality put together. hope this makes sense, --dkg [0] http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Pentabarf signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] dc10 page headers need updating
The headers on the dc10 schedule pages need updating; they still show dc9 headers afaict: https://penta.debconf.org/penta/schedule/dc10 I have no idea who can fix this, but hopefully a ticket will help keep it on the radar. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Debian Day ( or Open Day if you prefer )
On 05/28/2010 12:20 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote: > The Debian Day has been announced in 1st August in some free ad we got in a > magazine, so looks like we should have it. (BTW, penta should say this and > not only DebConf Day 1?) indeed, thanks or bringing this up, Ana. Is there a good link to pint people to about Open Day/Debian Day, what it is, and why it is? > I see 3 options: > > a) Look for "debian for users" talks. (This used to be the initial day of the > debian day) > b) Just schedule there the talks we thinkg are oriented for a general audience > and not only Debian people. > c) Combination of a and b. Look at the general audience talks we got and > complete them with some debian for users talks. i like (c). Maybe someone with conference access could add it as a track alongside the others? Or maybe we should consider possible synchronicities between Debian Day and the debian community outreach track? (i'm cc'ing andy oram and frank brokken here, who are co-coordinating the community outreach track). --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Debian Day ( or Open Day if you prefer )
On 05/28/2010 01:13 PM, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote: >> On 05/28/2010 12:20 PM, Ana Guerrero wrote: >> >>> The Debian Day has been announced in 1st August in some free ad we got in a >>> magazine, so looks like we should have it. (BTW, penta should say this and >>> not only DebConf Day 1?) > > I think we advertised the URL debianday.org in that ad, which we do own via > Ganneff, but it doesn't currently point anywhere. We are of course free to fix > that when we have somewhere for it to point. (Could even just redirect to a > page on the DC10 website.) putting debianday.org into my web browser currently directs me to http://debconf8.debconf.org/debianday.xhtml It appears to do this with an HTTP 302 redirect. This seems bad. Can we fix it? Is there a better pointer? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] TALKS: advocating broader relevance
Hi micah--
Thanks for bringing this up!
On 05/28/2010 01:33 PM, micah wrote:
> Personally, I think Debconf can both get a bit boring if the 'relevance'
> is applied too strictly, and too de-focused if it is applied to
> broadly. To make a great conference there should be a balance, and I
> feel like right now it is being applied *very* strictly, and I'd like to
> advocate that a broader interpretation be entertained.
I agree with this sentiment.
> I think it is good to have things like FTP-masters give a talk, but to
> exclude things that aren't as closely connected to Debian as a
> core-infrastructure team threatens to make Debconf too insular and
> staid. Things that are Debian-related, such as those that are part of
> the broader social context, *are* actually relevant and very interesting
> to not only Debian Developers, but the non-Developer FLOSS fanatics who
> will be coming to the conference.
note that this isn't necessarily a dilution of the conference -- it's a
chance to encourage non-debian members of the broader community to
engage with debian and showing how debian can be useful to their work.
This means both upstream ("free software") but downstream ("our users",
both in terms of derivatives and end users) are relevant. This seems
fitting to me, given the priorities we all aim for in the debian social
contract.
> ... the FLOSS track ...
Your e-mail referred a couple times to a "FLOSS track", but i think
there is no current FLOSS track, according to [0]. Do you mean the
Community Outreach track? Or do you mean more broadly talks that are
more about FLOSS than debian? Or is someone proposing a FLOSS track that
i don't know about?
--dkg
[0] http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Tracks
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team followup: scheduling and plenaries
On 06/01/2010 10:38 AM, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Donnerstag, 27. Mai 2010, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> > Another advantage [to having plenaries] might be to communicate specific >> > concerns to the >> > broader group, for example if we have a wrap-up session with reportbacks >> > from track coordinators, bosnia/DC11 exhortations, and RCBC victor >> > announcements. >> > >> > Do you see any advantages to having plenaries? Any disadvantages? > > I think you described the advantages well :-) i'll take that as a +1 for plenaries ;) > Another topic I'd probably like to see explained and discussed is the status > quo of the squeeze release. It's kind of the main topic of Debian ;) hrm. The only release team-ish talk i see is https://penta.debconf.org/penta/pentabarf/event/552 from Philipp Kern (cc'ed here), which doesn't sound like the plenary topic you've proposed exactly (it seems to be more about the general practice, rather than the specific release of squeeze). Would either of you (Philipp or Holger) be up for bringing this idea to the release team and seeing if they have anyone who wants to propose such a thing? It's very last-minute for a proposal, but i'd imagine we all agree that a capable proposal about the state of the Squeeze release would be a Good Thing. I certainly think it'd be potential plenary material. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] [talks team] List of accepted talks
On 06/01/2010 10:07 PM, Richard Darst wrote: > One of the things we wanted to use to outreach to the Columbia > community was a list of talks - basically, announcing a conference and > linking to some sample talks is better than just saying "there will be > talks". So one of the things that some local people were wanting was > a talks list in some nice format. We should have a concrete set of accepted talks to feed into whatever format you like after tomorrow's talks team meeting. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] talks team meeting 2010-06-02_19:00 NYC (23:00 UTC)
Hey folks-- as previous mails from micah and pablo pointed out, we are having our talks team "final cut" meeting today (wednesday, 2nd June) at 7pm NYC time (23:00 UTC). Like last week, we'll be meeting on #debconf-team, and moving to #debconf-talks if we find we're disturbing folks on #debconf-team. I've posted a brief outline of the proposed cut process, which will take up the majority of the meeting: http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Meetings#talks_team_meeting_Wednesday_2010-06-02_23:00UTC__.287pm_NYC_time.29 If you're on the talks team, please make sure you've at least looked at all the talks before the meeting starts, and rated the ones you feel are worth rating. Note: 10 of the proposals are social or evening events, which we expect to take place outside of scheduled time. I've marked those events as part of the "Unscheduled" track so that we can distinguish them and not bother ranking them. We will still need to follow up with their submitters, of course. Any debconf organizer is welcome to participate in the meeting, though there may be parts of it moved to the #debconf-talks channel for private discussion so people can express their opinions candidly. Afterward, only if there is a complete consensus to do so, we may publish the logs of the #debconf-talks channel as well. Any advice, suggestions, and participation from previous years' talks team participants would be very much appreciated! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
Hi debconf folks--
Ever write a bunch of code to solve a problem, get to the end of it, and
then realize there was a much better way you should have done it?
The dc10 talks team had a long meeting tonight [0], which i'm now pretty
convinced we did the Wrong Way, thanks mainly to my so-called
"leadership" and my lack of foresight and understanding.
I am reluctantly (and unilaterally) asking for a block on acting on
nearly all the results of the meeting. If any talks team member
(present at the meeting or not) reads this and says "what happened was
the right thing; go forward with the conclusions of the meeting as they
stand", i will set my block aside immediately.
What we did
---
We tried to decide which talks would be scheduled for the two main rooms
("interschool" and "davis") during daytime hours, addressing it as a
challenge to "cut" proposals based on (a) the ratings in pentabarf, and
(b) the number of time slots we expect to be available for those rooms.
We set aside those proposals which did not belong during daytime hours,
and we divided the remaining proposals into "accepted for scheduling in
the two main rooms" and "not accepted for scheduling". We started by
accepting the highest 50 of the ranked proposals, turning down the
lowest 20, and then went into a deliberative process over the remaining
middle as to whether they should be accepted or not.
We then worked on wording for mail that would be sent to the authors of
the two categories of proposal. [1]
What we missed
--
In writing up the mail for the "not accepted for scheduling" proposals,
it became apparent that we would encourage the authors of those
proposals to schedule their proposal in some other room -- it became
apparent that 414 Schapiro seems a likely candidate, and we might even
be able to get other classrooms.
Given the number of proposals, the number of time slots in a day, and
the number of rooms (if you include 414 Schapiro), we actually have more
than enough slots to host all proposals.
And since it seems unlikely that we would want to *stop* someone from
giving a serious, sane talk if space is available, we are actually
effectively accepting all talks.
The important differences between the two main rooms and the other
facilities we have are:
a) the main rooms are bigger (davis and interschool accomodate 200 and
75 people, respectively. 414 Schapiro and other classrooms seat ~20),
b) video-team can only realistically cover 2 events concurrently, so
the main rooms get video coverage, but the others don't.
However, our division of talks into "two main rooms" vs. "other" was
done based mostly on in-penta scoring, which is *not* the criteria we
should be using to decide room placement. Two examples of potential
problems:
0) we have both "main-room" and "non-main-room" proposals that were
desired to be part of tracks. We had talked about wanting tracks to run
in contiguous time slots in the same room. Do we want folks to have to
shuffle from room to room to follow a track?
1) we have some "non-main-room" proposals that seem likely to attract a
large crowd and probably warrant video (e.g. 532), while some excellent
"main-room" proposals will almost certainly be small and not want or
need video (e.g. 573). This is seems precisely wrong.
What should we do?
--
I think we should send an acceptance e-mail to all serious, sane,
non-withdrawn proposals as soon as possible. This e-mail should not
specify which room the proposal will go in.
Following that, we should try to allocate them to different rooms, based
on the following criteria:
0) how many people we expect to attend
1) what resources are needed (video-team coverage is the main thing i'm
thinking of here)
2) the max number of attendees the presenter(s) are willing to accept
3) membership in a track
These allocations wouldn't be perfect or fixed in stone, but would help
whoever does scheduling to see where they might fit best.
What was OK?
I said i want to block "nearly all the results" of the meeting-- i think
our decisions about what proposals should be plenaries (i.e. having
nothing scheduled opposite them) were reasonably done, and i don't see a
reason to object to some of the in-track merge suggestions we came to.
I'm very sorry about this, and sorry that my block here makes the talks
deadline slip still further. Please tell me if i should withdraw my block.
As part of my debconf10 organizing work, i will try to gather opinions
and document how we *should* have gone about things in hindsight, so
hopefully others can learn from our mistakes.
--dkg
[0]
http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Meetings#talks_team_meeting_Wednesday_2010-06-02_23:00UTC__.287pm_NYC_time.29
[1] http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/TalkDecisionEmails
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Debconf-team mailing list
Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
On 06/03/2010 03:47 AM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > Ever write a bunch of code to solve a problem, get to the end of it, and > then realize there was a much better way you should have done it? > > The dc10 talks team had a long meeting tonight [0], which i'm now pretty > convinced we did the Wrong Way, thanks mainly to my so-called > "leadership" and my lack of foresight and understanding. > > I am reluctantly (and unilaterally) asking for a block on acting on > nearly all the results of the meeting. If any talks team member > (present at the meeting or not) reads this and says "what happened was > the right thing; go forward with the conclusions of the meeting as they > stand", i will set my block aside immediately. [...] > I'm very sorry about this, and sorry that my block here makes the talks > deadline slip still further. Please tell me if i should withdraw my block. Sorry for the confusion about what i meant by "block" above. I meant: * i'm requesting that people should not act on the action items we produced in the meeting, including external notification. * "set my block aside" means that i will rescind this request immediately if anyone from the talks team tells me to. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
Hi Ana-- Thanks for the thoughtful feedback. On 06/03/2010 09:14 AM, Ana Guerrero wrote: > On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 03:47:52AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> In writing up the mail for the "not accepted for scheduling" proposals, >> it became apparent that we would encourage the authors of those >> proposals to schedule their proposal in some other room -- it became >> apparent that 414 Schapiro seems a likely candidate, and we might even >> be able to get other classrooms. > > Here is the problem we hit on previous years and lead in the creation > of the infamous "unofficial" track: > we reject your talk but you can do it "unofficially". There is not > difference with the "official" talks. At least not with the ones > schedules from the beginning (difference here: video recording) My understanding was that we were aiming to avoid the "official" vs. "unofficial" designations. Also, the wording people came up with for the "reject" mails (see the history of [0]) is not terribly reject-y. I believe that the jist of the discussion was that talks not accepted today could just be scheduled in other rooms/empty slots later. And we certainly have empty slots, given the 3 rooms available. > we should not use more > than 2 rooms and in some cases just 3. with three rooms, we have more than enough slots to accomodate every proposal and still have space left (esp. considering that not every proposal will pan out in a talk). In what cases should we have 3 rooms, and in what cases should we have 2 ? > As mentioned, we should not do talk selection and scheduling (room talk > allocation) at the same time. Firstly, we just should select the talks we > see fit and seem good for Debian and reject all that does not fall in this > category. Then we worry at how use the resources we have. this sounds like "official"/"unofficial" to me, which i thought we were trying to avoid. I don't mind it myself, though. > We have got very few submissions this year as i understand your mail, many talks from last year were submitted and scheduled at the last minute. as of today in penta, last year shows a total of 163 proposals total (10 undecided, 135 accepted, 18 rejected). this hear has 120 proposals, and the last-minute or on-site proposals have not come in yet. Is it really that much fewer? > Answering to "What should we do?" my suggestion: > - Accept 65-72 talks we believe are good for debconf. Send accept/reject > email. Publish list of accepted talks without scheduling. I am fine with this suggestion, though we might want to adjust the wording of the acceptance e-mail, since it implies all accepted talks will be in a large room. > To rejected > talks add we are studying the possibility of a extra unconference talk that > does not need to be necessarily recorded and still to be decided. This is vague enough that i would be more annoyed to receive it as a submitter than i would be to receive an "unofficial" or "non-main" mail. It also doesn't match the criteria we thought we were using when we made the current cut in penta. While i'm personally OK with using the cut decision we made against this idea, i'd want to make sure other folks who contributed to the decision don't feel like the rug was pulled out from under them. > - Keep allowing late submissions in penta. yes. > - Gather talks requirement and schedule the accepted talks in the 2 main > rooms. why not schedule some of the smaller, non-video-needing accepted talks for the 3rd (smaller) room? > - In some moment, maybe 1 week before debconf look at the late submissions, > see if something late minute is worthwhile to be added to the main set of > track. > Usually this is interesting debian stuff that would benefit of being record. > Look at the what there is left and study how to organize the unconference > track in a 3rd room. extrasuggestion: This does not need to be a schedule > organized in penta. yes, though i'd like to see it kept in penta so future organizers can see what actually happened. > This suggestion is assuming we only have video in 2 main talks, we tried to > put there the best material and we still allow and encourage last minute > talks without stress to video team because it is not recorded, and no stress > for the scheduler team because they do not need to update penta every 2 hours. However, we did not make the current cut based on who should get video :( we based it mainly on the relative scores in pentabarf ratings, and there is no "should get video" axis to score on. There are some incredibly relevant, accepted, "actualized" proposals that probably just don't need or even want video. There are so
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
On 06/03/2010 01:42 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > I've helped organized a bunch of conferences and selection processes and > one thing that is clear is that the process never is anywhere close to > where you'd like to be, largely because you are basically learning how > to do it while you are doing it. So you only really know how to do it > once you've finished. yeah, having more experienced minds guiding the process would have been better. > That said, I think we can just think of last night's process as > basically the ranking process for what should go in the two main rooms. > Then we should invite all submissions to present, as long as we have the > space. We have the space. Do you think we should keep the "accepted" to the two main rooms even in light of the event size, track membership, and video-team coverage issues? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
Hi Micah-- Thanks, i think your mail describes what happened and why we're in a tough/confused state right now. I also like your proposal, though i have two outstanding questions about it before i feel like going ahead with it in full: On 06/03/2010 02:59 PM, micah anderson wrote: > I would propose that the best way forward, at this point, taking into > considerations all the discussions here and on IRC would be this: > > 1. send an acceptance to all the currently 'accepted' talks in penta, we > don't bother including the 'two main rooms' details. it was accepted, > implementation details come later > > 2. send a reject notice to the bottom 20 that did not make the cut due > to the ratings could you draft the rejection notice you're proposing someplace? > 3. accept in penta and send an acceptance email to the middle third that > we had such a hard time deciding on last night, this email would be no > different than #1 > > 4. we schedule Schipiro (414) along with the two main rooms > > Doing this will result in plenty of room for last-minute space for > talks. Determining what to do with talks that were actually rejected > that are later re-submitted as last-minute would be up to the on the > ground schedulers. who or what are the "on-the-ground schedulers"? How are they expected to decide things? Are these people (or machines?) up for accepting the possible workload we're setting up here? > Schedulers will have two unknown variables: if a talk wants V-T > coverage, and how many people might want to attend any particular > talk. These are the things that will make scheduling difficult, if we > don't know them in advance. If its at all possible to add something to > penta and request that accepted talks indicate, then we should to help > the scheduling. Concretely, here's the info that it seems would be useful to gather: I'd say that we have v-t coverage options that the submitter or presenter should be able to choose: * need (e.g. remote participants) * want * don't care * do not want I think it might also be nice to ask the submitter/presenter to estimate: * how many attendees do you expect? * maximum number of attendees you would be willing to accomodate (leaving these blank means "don't know" in the first case and infinity in the second) If there was a way for attendees to indicate "i'd like to attend this talk", that might also help the schedulers decide which rooms are appropriate. What do other folks think? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
On 06/03/2010 03:27 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > I also like your proposal, though i have two outstanding questions about > it before i feel like going ahead with it in full: ugh. This is certainly not my decision to make, and i did not mean to imply that it was. The above should read "...before i feel like *endorsing* it in full." --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
On 06/03/2010 04:00 PM, micah anderson wrote: > On Thu, 03 Jun 2010 15:27:16 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor > wrote: >> On 06/03/2010 02:59 PM, micah anderson wrote: >>> 2. send a reject notice to the bottom 20 that did not make the cut due >>> to the ratings >> >> could you draft the rejection notice you're proposing someplace? > > Sure, but I welcome others to make changes. See the bottom of > http://whiteboard.debian.net/dc10-talks-mails.wb Thanks for writing that up. i'm fine with the current text on that page: == Talk rejected == Hello $PERSON-- Thanks for submitting your proposal event $TITLE for DebConf10. We appreciate your interest and the time you invested in putting together your proposed event. As you may know, we had a large number of submissions for talks, and a limited number of resources. After a long selection process your event was not selected for this year's Debconf. Thank you very much for taking the time to submit your event, we enjoyed having it as an option. We hope this doesn't discourage you from attending Debconf, in fact there will be opportunities for ad-hoc events to occur, if you should wish to still put it on. Details on how that will work will be available at the conference. sincerely, the debconf talks team >> who or what are the "on-the-ground schedulers"? How are they expected >> to decide things? Are these people (or machines?) up for accepting the >> possible workload we're setting up here? > > I don't know who or what these are, but we don't need to know that to go > forward with this plan. Based on what other people are saying, it sounds > like we will need to figure this out, I know Gunnar offered his services > at the conference for this purpose. In the past, these have not been > machines, I dont expect them to be this year either. OK by me, as long as we have at least one victi^W^W^Wolunteer for the role. > Leaving this up to a presenter may result in skewed answers, depending > on the person's relative feeling of how important, interesting their own > talk is (likely pretty high). I am not against asking for this, if it is > technically feasible, just that we should not be taking this information > literally. yes, also agreed. I'd be fine with moving forward with this plan if there are no objections. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
On 06/03/2010 03:27 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 06/03/2010 02:59 PM, micah anderson wrote: >> I would propose that the best way forward, at this point, taking into >> considerations all the discussions here and on IRC would be this: >> >> 1. send an acceptance to all the currently 'accepted' talks in penta, we >> don't bother including the 'two main rooms' details. it was accepted, >> implementation details come later >> >> 2. send a reject notice to the bottom 20 that did not make the cut due >> to the ratings > > could you draft the rejection notice you're proposing someplace? > >> 3. accept in penta and send an acceptance email to the middle third that >> we had such a hard time deciding on last night, this email would be no >> different than #1 >> >> 4. we schedule Schipiro (414) along with the two main rooms I haven't heard any objections to this plan. I've updated http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/TalkDecisionEmails to match the texts we talked about here. I propose we give MrBeige the go ahead to send the two batches of e-mails as soon as he has time to do so. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] talks team reportback (and block on meeting results)
On 06/04/2010 12:37 PM, Pablo Duboue wrote: > We appreciate your interest and the time you invested in putting > together your proposed event. Our talk selection committee felt > your submission on its current form would not attract enough > interest among the DebConf attendees and i'd rather say "we didn't pick it" than "no one is interested in your proposal" (i know, it's not exactly what you said but someone reading it sensitively might feel that way). For one thing, some accepted proposals have a very small number of people interested, and some rejected proposals probably have more. there were other criteria besides "acceptance". > it will not merit > your effort put forward in preparing the talk. i don't want to say this either. effort in preparing a talk is almost always useful for the preparer if the talk is about something they care about. > We hope this doesn't discourage you from attending Debconf, in > fact there will be opportunities for ad-hoc events to occur, if > you should wish to still put it on (if you decide to do so, we can > provide extended feedback to ensure a better fit for DebConf). what kind of extended feedback did you have in mind? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] RFH: scheduling DebConf10
hey folks-- at the global-team meeting today, i volunteered to work on scheduling the accepted talks for DebConf10. I've never done this before, and would appreciate any advice or assistance anyone has to offer. I'll almost certainly need reasonable liaisons from the venue team, the video team, and the talks team. We've promised a schedule by June 15th, 10 days away. Advice from anyone who has done this before would be awesome. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] RFH: coordinating ad-hoc events
Hi folks-- I'm going to try to work out a reasonable mechanism for helping people arrange ad-hoc events during the conference. This will be something like a wiki on which people can sign up for open slots for day X on day X-1, which then gets published/announced somehow at some reasonable cutoff time for each day. This is a separate project from scheduling the accepted talks, which i wrote about in a previous e-mail. Any help or suggestions on this would be really appreciated. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] RFH: scheduling DebConf10
On 06/07/2010 02:44 AM, Andreas Tille wrote: > On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 10:32:41AM +1200, Andrew McMillan wrote: >>> We've promised a schedule by June 15th, 10 days away. Advice from >>> anyone who has done this before would be awesome. > > Didn't I gave advise last week or the week before last week to this list > and CCing Vanessa who did the job together with me the last two years?? I'm sorry, i see Message-ID: <20100527132726.ga9...@an3as.eu>, which mentions CC'ing Vanessa, but is not actually CC'ed to anyone. and i don't know who Vanessa is. I'd be happy if you could forward this to her, and send me her address. Thanks! > This sounds more reasonable than the method we used (and I suggested in > my previous mail) to use Google calendars. While I'm not really paranoid > about Google it might have extra advantages to have the data accessible > on your own server rather than Google calendar. I feel the same way. > Update to my mail where I said that I will have no time this year: There > might be a slight chance that I could do some work from 13.6. on - but no > guarantee. Great, i'll keep that in mind and might give you a shout on the 13th. Thanks for the feedback, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] RFH: scheduling DebConf10
On 06/09/2010 11:59 AM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > On Jun 5, 2010, at 6:32 PM, Andrew McMillan wrote: >> I was involved in doing the scheduling for LCA 2010. What we did >> was to write every talk onto a post-it note, and then we drew up a whiteboard >> with columns for each day, and within that with columns for each room. >> >> We then stuck all the post-it's onto the whiteboard pretty much >> randomly and moved some of them around to avoid wrong-sized rooms, put good >> stuff for opening & closing, avoid scheduling clashes, ... >> >> This worked well for a face to face, but might not be quite so good >> for a team based around the world :-) [... removed stuff about caldav, which i think hans was *not* advocating ...] > This sounds like a good way to do it in my experience. Digital tools > are far too slow to do the initial organization. Post-ins are a great > way to get the overall schedule laid out, then it can be put into a > digtal schedule for the final tweaks. > > Shall we set up a time to meet up? i was planning on putting together a first draft during the day or evening (NYC time) tomorrow (Thursday 2010-06-10), as i'll likely be afk over the upcoming weekend. I have a large whiteboard at my apartment and i could easily get a bunch of post-it notes if anyone is up for coming over. Mail me off-list for directions. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] RFH: scheduling DebConf10
Hi Andrew-- On 06/05/2010 06:32 PM, Andrew McMillan wrote: > As an alternative though, I can provide accounts on a caldav server. We > can then create a calendar for each room, and events for each accepted > talk, and move them around in much the same manner using a CalDAV client > such as Evolution, Lightning or Sunbird. We can very likely create the > inital events from an export of data in Penta. I think i'm leaning toward your post-it note suggestion, but i'd like to experiment with the caldav approach too. If it's not too much work, can you get me authorized to use your caldav server? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] DebConf10 scheduling is available
I completed the scheduling for DebConf10. You can all hate me for it now ;) The schedule starts each day at 10:00am, and concludes at 5:30pm or 6:30pm, depending on the day. Already, some concerns were raised on IRC about only having a 1hr gap for lunch. If we want that lunch gap to be 1.5hrs instead (e.g. if we have to eat in staggered shifts, or if people just think it's too tight) then i'd be fine with either moving all the events before lunch earlier a half-hour, or moving all the events after lunch later by a half-hour. What do folks think? I have also left a half-hour break in every afternoon as well so that people don't go totally stir crazy (though on Tuesday, i've scheduled the group photo for that break). Anyway, i expect there will be bugs and problems with the schedule, and i welcome criticism and proposals for how to improve it. We also need to think about how to announce the changes to the participants. I don't have a plan for that yet. --dkg PS evening/social events have not been scheduled yet at all. Micah, were you following up on those? Could you give a reportback when you get a chance? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] longer lunch! [was: Re: DebConf10 scheduling is available]
On 06/16/2010 07:09 AM, Andrew McMillan wrote: > Traditionally DebConf has been pretty lightly scheduled because of the > huge value that comes from the people meeting and communicating over the > meals, in the corridors, in the hacklab, and through the evenings. Enough people have echoed this sentiment that i'm ok with it if everyone else is. i'm a little concerned about making things interfere with dinner, but i think another hour later won't be a problem. So, i'd like to request: UPDATE event SET start_time = start_time + '1 hour' WHERE start_time >= '12 hours' AND conference_id = 4; That should give us a 2-hour lunch break every day, and days will end at 6:30 or 7:30 instead of 5:30 or 6:30 --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] DebConf10 scheduling is available
On 06/16/2010 07:09 AM, Andrew McMillan wrote: > Herding 250-odd DD's into a group photo does not fit in 30 minutes. > You're lucky if it fits into an hour. Do you know who will be taking > the photo? I've done it in the past, and am happy to do so again. Aigars Mahinovs (cc'ed here) added the item for the group photo to penta. i dunno if he's planning on coordinating it. I was told it wouldn't take a full hour when we were reviewing talks, but i've never been there, and i can imagine it gets complicated so i'm happy that you've raised this concern. If everyone is coming on the day trip, it could be fun to do the photo at Coney Island. I'm happy to re-schedule the group photo to whatever time makes sense, for anyone who stakes a clear claim to the coordination of the event. FWIW, we should have sunlight relatively late in the day, if we decide to do things outdoors in the evening: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/astronomy.html?n=179&month=8&year=2010&obj=sun&afl=-11&day=1 --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] DebConf10 scheduling is available
On 06/16/2010 01:45 PM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > Yes, I will handle that. Just give me a time slot and I'll try to find > the best possible location among the available places and check the > light conditions during the previous days, so that there are no > surprises. That sounds very reasonable. > If people are in one place, then the whole process can be done in half > an hour, if people need to be called in from multiple locations, then > 45 minutes should be enough. It is however quite typical for people to > want to stand around and chat after the photo and also take their own > mini-group photos. sounds like an hour-long slot does make more sense. Not sure how to do that now, though with our longer lunch and later end time. Is a morning slot too brutal? One day start at 9am instead of 10am? > I will scout a location during Debcamp. I think we should schedule a > time spot during main Debconf, with Coney Island as a backup - maybe > make a more 'fun' photo there, just like we did with pool photos in > Mexico. sounds good. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] Cheese [was: Re: DebConf10 scheduling is available]
On 06/18/2010 11:31 AM, Clint Adams wrote: > There are many other cheese shops where you can get excellent cheese > for high prices. I'm just changing the Subject of the thread here so i don't have a heart attack every morning when i see a dozen new messages about debconf10 scheduling. cheers, and carry on! --dkg (who does not eat cheese anyway, but is planning on exhaustive scientific investigations of the important whose-beer-is-better question) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] proposed talks scheduling adjustment
hey folks-- On IRC, biella brought forward a concern about the scheduling of Eben Moglen's talk. To address it, I'd like to propose Plan A: a shift of the schedules to accomodate Eben's request to have his talk earlier than day 6: * move eben's talk (641) from day 6 to day 3 -- keep same time and place. * move all talks in the enterprise track later by one hour. This means talks 559, 589, 578, 556, 647, and 588 advance (actually, 589 will jump lunch as a result, so it should move forward by 3 hours instead of 1 -- assuming we haven't done the discussed lunch rescheduling business) * move guido trotter's talk (529) to the morning of day 6 (10am). A simpler change (plan B) to accomodate a day shift for Eben would be to just directly swap Eben's talk (641) with Guido's talk (529), but that would put Eben at the end of the day, and my impression is that a morning slot was desired). I think i could make all these changes by hand myself, but i'm not convinced that i should do so without feedback from the rest of debconf-team. I'm also not keen about making a lot of changes like this one, but i think this case is reasonable. Other thoughts? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Fwd: DebConf11 official reconfirmation of the winner
On 07/08/2010 09:32 AM, Adnan Hodzic wrote: > Quito, Equator, München, Germany and Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina at least in en_US, the first country mentioned is spelled Ecuador, not Equator. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/08/2010 12:05 PM, Richard Darst wrote: > I was looking at the talk schedule and hours for John Jay (cafeteria), > which we were likely going to use during debconf. > > B: 0700-0945 > L: 1130-1400 > D: 1700-1900 > > Lunch overlaps well, with or without the changes from Monday's global > meeting. > > However, the last talk ends at 19:30, which doesn't mesh with these > hours. However, as we know, not everyone is expected to go to every > talk, so maybe that is ok. Plus, the main auditorium talks tend to > end at 18:00. > > > Here is another thing I noticed: Most days, it is the Interschool Lab > talks that go until 19:00, with the Davis talks ending at 18:30. From > a columbia standpoint, ending Interschool earlier would be greatly > preferable. Interschool is in a part of the building which nominally > closes to non-staff at 18:00. We have special permission to be in > there later, but someone will have to prop the door open after that. > > If we say the last talk ends at 18:30, then we don't have trouble > letting people get in (we say, last entrance is 18:00), and the lower > level (Davis, 414) is open later since that's where we have security > for. It would help a lot to reduce Columbia stress. > > I realize that Interschool is the "track room" and changing things > this late will be really annoying. I just thought I'd put this out > there and see what people thought. I think that the food schedule alone suggests that we need to move talks times earlier and/or tighten up the lunchtime gap. If we have to trade off the possibility of losing some morning sleep and losing the chance to eat dinner, i suspect most folks will want to eat dinner. the issues with the interschool hours add further weight to these needs. and i think we need to acknowledge that some people will be in the cafeteria during some of the scheduled events. So the earlier proposal might stand, regardless of security cost concerns. I'll call this rescheduling X: * move pre-lunch events 30 minutes earlier, move post-lunch events 1 hour earlier. This would mean every scheduled event would end by 18:30. however, that's not much time for attendees of that last event to get to the dining hall and eat. But that should be OK as long as we're allowed to stay after closing time (that is, if closing time only matters for *arrival* and not for eating) If a last-half-hour rush on the cafeteria each day would be poor form, then we might need to consider other options: rescheduling Y: * move pre-lunch events 1 hour earlier (i.e. start at 9am). move 1 post-lunch timeslot to pre-lunch. Move remaining post-lunch slots 1.5 hours earlier. This would have us finishing by 18:00, with 1.5 hrs for lunch. rescheduling Z: * move pre-lunch events 30 minutes earlier (day starts at 9:30). move post-lunch slots 1.5 hrs earlier. day ends at 18:00, 1 hour for lunch. anyone who wants to have a longer lunch could simply not attend the first post-lunch period. If entry to the cafeteria is all that matters (not leaving), i prefer X myself. If we need to be out of there entirely by 19:00, i prefer Y to Z. What do other folks think? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/08/2010 06:49 PM, Margarita Manterola wrote: > How about, rescheduling M: > > * move pre-lunch events 30 minutes earlier and add 1 slot (start at > 9:30, end at 12:30), move post-luch events 1 hour earlier (start at > 14:00) and DO NOT have the half hour break from 16 to 16:30 (end at > 18:00). This means 7 slots instead of the current 6 (3 in the > morning 4 in the afternoon). Just to be clear, my understanding of rescheduling M leaves a 30-minute gap for "lunch" time, with no other gaps during the day. This sounds like a grueling schedule for the video-team (not to mention other folks), but i'm willing to entertain it if people are interested. > I have no idea what exactly that break was for, but taking into > account the closing hours, the dinner hours and everything, I think it > could be better to just do without it. I might be wrong and there > might be a very strong reason for it. I just wanted to throw in a > possibility. I don't have a strong argument for the break, other than that four contiguous hours of talks sounds exhausting, and it might be nice to have a bit of scheduled downtime where you could follow up on things with other participants without feeling like you were keeping them from being at another session. I've never been to a debconf before, though, so i don't know if this is really relevant to other folks' experience of past conferences. What do other people think? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] UPDATE we can sponsor 70 % of queue B now and 100% queue A (proposal inside)
On 07/08/2010 12:17 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > [ please Cc:-me on replies ] > > On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 05:20:26PM +0200, Ana Guerrero wrote: >> I added to the budget the donations from FFIS (~680USD) and we have >> a drop out in queue A. This is 2000USD more, that means more money >> because the total of queue A is also less. >> >> Take a look at rev 1501. At row 50, you can see sponsoring 70% to queue >> B and 100% queue A, we still have ~ 6700USD buffer money. > > \o/ > >> As agreed by IRC for some people, it is important telling people from >> queue B soon so they can make travel arrangements and because they have >> been waiting for a lot time now. > > FWIW I agree with that and I believe queue B people should be mailed > ASAP, possibly today. Yes, i agree with this as well. Please fund queue A 100% and queue B at 70%. getting people to the conference is really important. thanks for all the organizing and funds wrangling, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/08/2010 08:48 PM, Margarita Manterola wrote: > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 8:59 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor > wrote: >> On 07/08/2010 06:49 PM, Margarita Manterola wrote: >>> How about, rescheduling M: >>> >>> * move pre-lunch events 30 minutes earlier and add 1 slot (start at >>> 9:30, end at 12:30), move post-luch events 1 hour earlier (start at >>> 14:00) and DO NOT have the half hour break from 16 to 16:30 (end at >>> 18:00). This means 7 slots instead of the current 6 (3 in the >>> morning 4 in the afternoon). >> >> Just to be clear, my understanding of rescheduling M leaves a 30-minute >> gap for "lunch" time, with no other gaps during the day. > > No, it's a 90 minute gap, from 12:30 till 14:00. > > Talk 1: 9:30 to 10:30 > Talk 2: 10:30 to 11:30 > Talk 3: 11:30 to 12:30 > > Lunch: 12:30 to 14:00 > > Talk 4: 14:00 to 15:00 > Talk 5: 15:00 to 16:00 > Talk 6: 16:00 to 17:00 > Talk 7: 17:00 to 18:00 ah, OK. i stand corrected. But here's why i was confused: we already have 7 talk slots scheduled most days (Except day 1 and day 7), not 6 slots (though the final talk slot each day is not heavily used). So rescheduling M is in line with the other proposals. To recap the proposals: (0 is the status quo) 0: 10:00-12:00, LUNCH, 14:00-16:00, Break, 16:30-19:30 M: 9:30-12:30, LUNCH, 14:00-18:00 X: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 13:00-15:00, Break, 15:30-18:30 Y: 9:00-12:00, LUNCH, 13:30-15:30, Break, 16:00-18:00 Z: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 12:30-14:30, Break, 15:00-18:00 >> I've never been to a debconf before, though, so i don't know if this is >> really relevant to other folks' experience of past conferences. > > I'm not sure this was done before. I can appreciate the gap if there > were no constraints regarding schedule. It'd be a nice moment for a > "coffee break". However, given that we can't really end that late, > I'd rather end earlier without the gap than then have to rush in order > to get my food. taking into account this concern, i'd like to submit 3 other options by analogy with X, Y, and Z that remove the break: X': 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 13:00-18:00 Y': 9:00-12:00, LUNCH, 13:30-17:30 Z': 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 12:30-17:30 I can think of several other ways to formulate the changes, but this is enough as it is, i think. Could other dc10 orga folks voice preferences here? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/12/2010 02:31 AM, Richard Darst wrote: > On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 09:55:52AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > >> To recap the proposals: >> >> (0 is the status quo) >> >> 0: 10:00-12:00, LUNCH, 14:00-16:00, Break, 16:30-19:30 >> >> M: 9:30-12:30, LUNCH, 14:00-18:00 >> X: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 13:00-15:00, Break, 15:30-18:30 >> Y: 9:00-12:00, LUNCH, 13:30-15:30, Break, 16:00-18:00 >> Z: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 12:30-14:30, Break, 15:00-18:00 > > Which of these was eventually selected? None has been selected. schultmc was the only person good enough to voice an opinion (he prefers Z). Of course, i'm assuming that marga prefers M. I actually prefer Y myself, i think, though i understand that a 9am start time is considered cruel and unusual by several usually vocal parties (though i don't think that concern has been voiced in this thread). I'm pretty much at a loss as to what to do here, though i think i'd like to avoid X for the sake of dining hall overlap. Any other feedback? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/13/2010 05:24 PM, Jonathan McDowell wrote: > On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 05:19:28PM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> On 07/12/2010 02:31 AM, Richard Darst wrote: >>> On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 09:55:52AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >>> >>>> To recap the proposals: >>>> >>>> (0 is the status quo) >>>> >>>> 0: 10:00-12:00, LUNCH, 14:00-16:00, Break, 16:30-19:30 >>>> >>>> M: 9:30-12:30, LUNCH, 14:00-18:00 >>>> X: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 13:00-15:00, Break, 15:30-18:30 >>>> Y: 9:00-12:00, LUNCH, 13:30-15:30, Break, 16:00-18:00 >>>> Z: 9:30-11:30, LUNCH, 12:30-14:30, Break, 15:00-18:00 >>> >>> Which of these was eventually selected? >> >> None has been selected. schultmc was the only person good enough to >> voice an opinion (he prefers Z). Of course, i'm assuming that marga >> prefers M. >> >> I actually prefer Y myself, i think, though i understand that a 9am >> start time is considered cruel and unusual by several usually vocal >> parties (though i don't think that concern has been voiced in this thread). > > Anything but Y, with a preference for 0. I'm not a morning person. X out > of the 9:30 start options - an hour seems a bit tight for lunch. In particular, this line of rescheduling is prompted by early closing hours of the dining hall where most meals will be eaten. It is open for dinner from 17:00-19:00, as i understand it. 0 and X both make it so that there will not be much time for attendees of the later sessions to actually get dinner. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/14/2010 03:50 AM, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Dienstag, 13. Juli 2010, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> None has been selected. schultmc was the only person good enough to >> voice an opinion (he prefers Z). Of course, i'm assuming that marga >> prefers M. > > (Ana wrote she preferes M.) so she did; sorry i missed that earlier. > /me too prefers M, ok, M looks to be a growing consensus, and i want to wrap up this open issue. So i'm calling it in favor of M. Thank you Marga for suggesting this rescheduling proposal! Here is the postgres commands to accomplish M: BEGIN UPDATE event SET start_time = start_time - '30 minutes' WHERE conference_id = 4 AND start_time <= '11:00'; UPDATE event SET start_time = '11:30' WHERE conference_id = 4 AND start_time = '14:00'; UPDATE event SET start_time = '14:00' WHERE conference_id = 4 AND start_time = '15:00'; UPDATE event SET start_time = start_time - '1 hour 30 minutes' WHERE conference_id = 4 AND start_time >= '16:30'; COMMIT Could one person (only!) with write access please make this change and report back when it is done? I could webmonkey click change it all, but i'd really rather not. thanks! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] dealing with late penta event submissions
hey folks-- I swear i am not trying to open a can of worms here. We had one big (messy, disastrous) round of talk reviews, accepted some talks, and encouraged folks to organize not-accepted talks on-the-fly during the conference with whatever unconference system we set up. However, as predicted by everyone with prior debconf experience, more submissions are still coming in. I have personally approved two of the late-submission talks and officially scheduled them. This might be overstepping what i should have done, and i'm fine with those decisions being reversed if people feel they should be. Please let me know if you think i've made a mistake (off-list if you like, i'll report the general sentiment on-list and fix what needs fixing). The two talks i approved and scheduled myself were: * Bits from the Release Team (suggested/encouraged by zack and offered by 3 of the team members who will be present) * Project Caua by maddog. This was advocated by both andy oram (heading up the community outreach track) and biella for DebDay. However, there are about 15 other late submissions that have never been reviewed and are neither accepted nor rejected. So my questions are: What should we do with those late submissions? Should we explicitly schedule any more of them? Should we leave them up to the during-conference first-come-first-serve unconference system (which does not yet currently exist)? Should we do something else? It would be nice to at least mail the submitters of these events with an idea of what they should expect. --dkg PS this message is sent to debconf-team@ because i think it's important to be public about it (particularly about the steps i've taken). However, if you feel the need to have not-publicly-archived discussion about these questions, i would encourage followups to ta...@debconf.org, not just to me personally. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/14/2010 06:29 PM, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote: > On Wed, Jul 14, 2010 at 11:12:23AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: >> Could one person (only!) with write access please make this change and >> report back when it is done? I could webmonkey click change it all, but >> i'd really rather not. > > Done. As discussed on IRC, please verify that it did the right schedule > adjustments. Thanks! It looks right to me. Marga, can you take a look at the schedule when you get a chance and let me know if i've faithfully interpreted your proposal? https://penta.debconf.org/penta/schedule/dc10/ --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] [Debconf10-localteam] JJ Food summary: 2010-07-12
On 07/15/2010 07:22 AM, Gabriella Coleman wrote: > On 07/15/2010 02:11 AM, Richard Darst wrote: >> Hi, >> >> In order to reserve John Jay, we need to do it something like _now_... >> >> Is anyone opposed to brian and I working to reserve John Jay for >> W/Th/F DebCamp and M/T/Th/F DebConf under the proposal listed below? > > no objections. i also have no objections to this plan. thanks to everyone doing this work! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/15/2010 01:16 PM, Margarita Manterola wrote: > Regarding the Schedule, it looks fine, BUT there shouldn't be > something scheduled at the same time that the group photo. This was > scheduled during the afternoon break and it's now parallel to 2 other > talks. Whoops, you're right. the previous discussions had suggested that 30 minutes wasn't enough anyway :/ iirc, Aigars (Cc'ed here) had said he would scout out lighting, timing, and locations and propose some alternate time for the photo shoot, but i don't think anyone has followed up on that. I've removed the scheduled times for the group photo for the moment -- when we know what we want to do we can put it wherever makes sense. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/15/2010 03:30 PM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > Micah is correct. It can also be a 30-45m slot just before lunch or > dinner, so that impact of delaying people for 5-10 minutes extra is > minimal. Any preference for a 9:30-10:30 slot vs. 11:30-12:30 ? I've cleared up space on Thursday morning. The simplest thing for me to do would be a morning shoot (9:30-10:30). But i could also move all pre-lunch talks on Thursday earlier by 1 hour and make the group photo from 11:30-12:30 (just before the 90 minute lunch break) If this is going to be an outdoor shoot, i suspect that 9:30-10:30 will be more pleasant (cooler) for those milling around/posing for an hour. otoh, late risers might be less likely to show for the morning shoot. Let me know what you want me to do. Thanks for heading this up, Aigars! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/15/2010 05:04 PM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: > The later spot, please. It would be bad to loose a bunch of people due > to the early scheduling. > I will try to find a place in the shade for the shoot (when I'll be on-site). > > If it makes scheduling easier, 12:00-12:30 should be sufficient time. if we do 12 - 12:30, that gives the late-risers a 30 minute reprieve on Thursday (i.e. we'd start the day at 10 instead of 9:30). This seems to be the same question about adjusting schedules on the weekends. better to adjust times a bit? or better to have a consistent schedule? I lean toward the consistent schedule, but i'm open to feedback, and i don't want to keep jerking the schedule around if we can help it. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] server settup and network testing
On 07/16/2010 02:06 AM, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > -we need a homer (or somewhere else) to run dc10.debconf.org DNS (amongst > other things (but far fewer other things than most years)) I can bring a low-power machine to run DNS if you like. I don't have anything spare that remotely approaches the machines you've described in terms of hardware, but if the only requirement is DNS that should be OK. in particular, i can offer a VIA C7 machine or a SheevaPlug (ARM-based) or both for the duration of debconf. i'm happy to configure and administer them, and to give other reasonable people admin rights on them as well. Let me know if this would be useful. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Weekend talk scheduling
On 07/15/2010 12:02 PM, Moray Allan wrote: > I think changing the schedule depending on the day will confuse people, so > unless there's a strong positive reason to change I'd suggest we keep things > fixed. With my scheduler hat on, i'm going to agree with Moray here. I also don't think we want to incur more security-related costs by needing to retain guards over a longer period of time (e.g. if we made longer lunch breaks or more interspersed breaks throughout the day). Given the overall paucity of response on this issue, i'm going to assume that it's ok with going with the current schedule. If you feel very strongly that we really should change the schedule, speak up and make a concrete proposal we can all consider. Otherwise, let's go with how it is. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Please move Debconf video training to beginning
Hi Michael-- On 07/07/2010 10:24 AM, Michael J Daniel wrote: > Please consider moving the Debconf video training from the 6th day to > the 1st day. > This information will be more valuable to participants at the beginning > of the conference, > rather than when the conference is almost over. Are you part of the debconf video team? (i'm asking because i really don't know, and i'm trying to get the context for this request) My understanding was that this was as much a "tour" (e.g. getting people involved for future years and to replicate v-t's work for other conferences) as it was a training for this conference. I'm assuming that there will be other training events during debcamp (before debconf starts, that is) to get the current year's team in shape. edrz, can you speak to this? Hrm, reviewing penta, i see that there is a submission note: >> The DebConf Videoteam would like to run several instances of this >> event: Once or Twice during DebCamp as a check of all the systems and >> training for volunteers; Perhaps during Open Day (or whatever we are >> calling it this year) to show off our tools; and again towards the end >> of the conference as a follow-on to the Conference Video talk (637). i've just corrected the ordering between 637 and 638 (637 should have come first, and now it does), but we don't have the suggested other instances of this event. edrz, what should we do about this? do you want to submit debcamp-specific events that we should schedule and publicly announce via penta? if so, do we want to do that for other events as well? And does the video team need another instance of training on DebianDay too? Sorry to have more questions than answers, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Please move Debconf video training to beginning
On 07/20/2010 01:31 PM, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > My thought was mainly to have them in a schedule somewhere. It didn't > occur to me that penta wouldn't allow the same event to have multiple > instances. I'll put in several training sessions to be scheduled during > DebCamp. Thanks. please mark them with the "DebCamp" track so that they're easier to find. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk scheduling and eating/venue hours
On 07/15/2010 05:51 PM, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On 07/15/2010 05:04 PM, Aigars Mahinovs wrote: >> The later spot, please. It would be bad to loose a bunch of people due >> to the early scheduling. [...] > I lean toward the consistent schedule, but i'm open to feedback, and i > don't want to keep jerking the schedule around if we can help it. I've gone ahead with the consistent schedule. Thursday now starts at 9:30 like all the other days, and the group photo is from 11:30 to 12:30 on Thursday, with nothing scheduled opposite it. i've marked it as being in Davis Auditorium just so that it shows up on the web-based schedule, but that doesn't mean that's where we'll take the photo. Regards, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Penta
I got the following message about penta from a friend. Could someone with write access to the web site please look at fixing them? (note that this user does not have the SPI root CA in their certificate list) thanks, --dkg On 07/20/2010 06:18 PM, a friend wrote: > A blog directed me straight to https://penta.debconf.org/dc10_schedule/ > for info on Debian Day, and I had a hell of a time finding my way from > there to the rest of the Debconf site. > > There are a few problems: > > The logo image (https://media.debconf.org/dc10/images/DebConf10logo.png) > is on a separate domain. Until I tried to load it directly, it was > simply not appearing. Once I tried to load the image itself in my > browser, I was asked to approve the security excepting (self signed > cert, I believe) and the image started appearing. > > So that's one. But there's also this: > > The link to http://debconf10.debconf.org is anchored to an image: > src="/dc10_schedule/images/conference-128x128.png" > > that doesn't exist: > https://penta.debconf.org/dc10_schedule/images/conference-128x128.png > > Or rather, it does, but it is a 1x1 clear pixel, which means I can't > possibly find my way to the main conference page. > > To fix, just copy > https://media.debconf.org/dc10/images/DebConf10logo.png to > https://penta.debconf.org/dc10_schedule/images/conference-128x128.png signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] has my presentation being scheduled?
Hi Daniel-- On 07/21/2010 05:17 AM, D M German wrote: > I submitted a proposal for a presentation and it was supposed to be > accepted. yes, your talk is on 2010-08-03 from 11:30 to 12:30 local time in Davis Auditorium. For some reason, it had been marked as "not public", which is why it was not showing up on the public schedule. It should be visible here now: https://penta.debconf.org/dc10_schedule/day_2010-08-03.en.html (as an aside to the other debconf orga folks: i just used a db query to determine that there were a few other accepted talks that were also not public, despite the fact that i'm certain we made them all public at some point -- i've fixed those now, but please keep an eye out for such things) Thanks for catching this, Daniel! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Nametags design
On 07/22/2010 04:23 PM, Raphael Geissert wrote: > For those who have two keys I think I'm only going to include the last 20 > characters of each key's fingerprint. The QR code is too complex otherwise > (which makes it harder for mobile phones and other devices to scan it.) For two keys, if space is an issue, please only use the stronger/more recent one (the one that people are trying to transition *to*), and provide its full fingerprint. Thanks for working on these, Raphael! --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Please move Debconf video training to beginning
On 07/23/2010 08:55 AM, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > I created 676 and scheduled it for Tuesday the 27th in Interschool. Thanks for doing this, Eric. > However, it shows up neither in the logged-in nor the exported versions > of the schedule. I can create the others (Thursday in Davis ... maybe > one other). But, there's not much point if they don't show up, I guess. I just checked the "Public event" box on the scheduling tab. it seems to be showing up now. If you could create and schedule the other video-team training event(s) that would be great. Thanks again, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Nametags design
On 07/23/2010 11:32 AM, Ana Guerrero wrote: > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 03:26:52PM +0200, Judit Foglszinger wrote: >>> Isn't the email address the only useful unique identifier we have for >>> people? >> >> Isn't the nickname? > > Nop, no everybody is in IRC or have a Debian login. I would like leave > having the email in there. I agree with Ana. the e-mail is also in people's OpenPGP User IDs, which is useful as a unique identifier. Please don't omit the e-mail address from the nametags. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] temperature in Carleton Lounge
I had a couple frustrating calls with Columbia facility about trying to make the temperature more reasonable. It's currently about 65°F, and it would be more reasonable to have it targeted around 73°F or 74°F (sorry to the people who use reasonable units -- it's better to communicate with folks around here in °F). My second call was a bit more fruitful than the first, in that i spoke with someone named Javier who said he'd created a ticket in the Columbia University facilities system. But he couldn't tell me the ticket number unless i had a University ID (a "Uni"). He offered to assign the ticket to anyone who did have a Uni, and was willing to send it to Richard Darst. So Richard, if you get the ticket ID for that, it might be useful for following up. I spoke with two other facilities workers who happened to pass by, and they each said that they couldn't do anything about it, and that it would take a long time to get a response. Apparently, the room's temperature is administered centrally by the "control shop", but we don't have direct access to them. Anyway, if you're in Carleton, and anyone from facilities comes by to check out the room, please tell them we want the temperature to be targeted at 74°F, and report back to the list with the situation. thanks, --dkg PS we should be aware that on previous visits, there was no cooling at all, and it was an oven. We do *not* want to tell them to turn off the cooling in Carelton Lounge. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] [Debconf10-localteam] please review (signing up for volunteering to help with talks)
On 07/28/2010 07:23 PM, Holger Levsen wrote: > * provide the speaker with water > * not only tell the speaker, she has 10/5/0 minutes left, but also enforce > this > * tell the speaker in advance, that they actually only have $timeslot minus 5 > minutes available, so that people can breathe and change rooms after an > event. > > I hope everybody is ok with the last change :) yes, indeed. thanks for the pointer. We should also probably make "10 minutes left", "5 minutes left", and "1 minute left" signs for each room. that way, the talkmeister has something concrete to hold up to show the speaker without audible interruptions. Could someone take charge of making 3 sets of those signs? > Sadly the timeslots in penta leave no time between actuall talks, or rather > we > forgot to make them like that. 15min breaks between talks probably would have > been even better, but I think it's too late to make this change. Also I know > it took the ccconference more then 20 years of experience to realize > such "long" breaks between talks are good. OTOH DebConf is considerably > smaller, thus moving between rooms will not take so much time, so hopefully > 5min work well. Unfortunately, given the preferences for wakeup times, the hours of the cafeteria, and the costs of keeping the talks rooms open late, adding 15 minutes between talks would have left us with many fewer slots for talks. > Also please note that those 5min of breaks are not only needed for the > videoteam (which definitly needs those little breaks badly) but also for > everybody, it's simply impossible to move from Davis to Interschool lab in 0 > seconds and even 5min sometimes will be a challange. Yes, that's true. edrz rightly points out the elevator as a potential source of problems. do we have access to the northern stairwell near interschool? a few flights of stairs between talks will help people work up some body heat to combat the chill :p --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] hacklab and davis networking changes to benefit video team
Q and micah and i talked through the network configurations yesterday and made some decisions about the network. These decisions were spurred by some networking failures experienced by the video team that resulted (afaict) in the loss of some video recordings (and the failure of some live streams). The changes are: * both hacklabs are now individually NAT'ed. machines in the CS Lounge should get IP addresses in the 10.17.0.0/20 range, and machines in Carleton should get addresses in the 10.17.128.0/20 range. * we are no longer bridging IPv6 traffic out of the NAT -- there was too much Multicast and broadcast traffic generated, which was choking switches that the v-t really needs to not be choked. Instead, we're using a Hurricane-electric-provided IPv6 tunnel to map a public /64 range to each hacklab. Carleton has 2001:470:1f07:a54::/64 and the CS lounge has 2001:470:1f07:a55::/64 * Davis no longer has debconf-provided wireless for attendees. Sorry, but getting the video stream running is more important than letting people surf the web or check mail during talks. if you want to use the 'net during a talk in Davis, please either use the Columbia Wireless (which tends to fail when > ~12 people use it concurrently) or leave Davis and go to one of the hacklabs. i'm happy to discuss the rationales and implementation details, and to consider proposals for how to get attendee wireless back into Davis. But please talk to me, Micah, Andrew, or Q about it. And do *not* try to change the infrastructure without talking it over with us beforehand. we'd like to have things more stable for attendees than we've been able to thus far. Thanks, --dkg PS big thanks to Raphael for his help in getting these changes deployed to the hacklabs last night. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Credit to Richard for DebConf10
On 08/05/2010 01:19 PM, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote: > > Yes indeed, let's hear it for Richard! Yes: yay Richard! Richard, you have pulled this conference through in so many ways that i can't even begin to count them. Your work has been and continues to be very very much appreciated. --dkg PS thanks to Jimmy for starting this thread! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Sunday Clean Up
On 08/05/2010 03:58 PM, Richard Darst wrote: > On Thu, Aug 05, 2010 at 03:25:57PM -0400, Gabriella Coleman wrote: >> Hi, >> >> So anyone on the orga team who can be here for Sunday breakdown should. >> I will send an announcement to debconf-announce seeking volunteers as well. >> >> We don't have a game plan for break down so we should arrange some >> meeting or talk about it during our local team meeting. We talked briefly at the poorly-attended local team meeting today at 7:30 in front of John Jay. The plan as it currently stands is to start teardown Saturday evening, after the Closing Plenary. We hope to get as much done as possible on Saturday evening, and then some of us will return Sunday morning at 10am (assuming we can get into the space) to put the final touches on the job. > - take out all electronics, make sure they get back to the right > people > (there should probably be some phased plan for starting this > Saturday evening, while making sure of things like "video people > have the CS network to review however late they need") > Perhaps the hacklab setup people can come up with timings and plans > for a phased tear down. > - Take down rental furniture and stack it where it came from. Count > it up to make sure it's all there and in the right place > - Return furniture to the rooms it came from. > - Put chairs back in Davis. > - All the cleaning we are supposed to be doing ever night, but very > complete. > - detailed garbage pick-up/sweeping > - take down all tape and cables. remove smudges and grime from > walls > (see list in Carleton hacklab for a big list of cleaning-related > things) This list sounds great, and i will personally take responsibility of laying out plans for the hacklab teardowns if i can get a sense of where the extra chairs and tables need to go. I assume that all the CRF equipment can be returned to the coffee room, as long as we order it and label it neatly. Would that be OK? > Right now, it seems the most important thing to do is decide which > hacklabs have what deactivated at what times. There are two proposals on the table from the meeting today: A) tear down Carleton immediately after we eat after the closing plenary, and start on the CS lounge when Carelton is completely removed. B) tear down Carelton during the day on Saturday sometime (before the closing plenary) and start on the CS lounge after the closing plenary. I prefer option A myself, as i'd like to attend the talks, and i'd like to let the lingering attendees have a space (in the cs hacklab) to wrap up last-minute projects. So unless i hear otherwise, i'll assume we're going with choice A. Either way, i think we should focus on one hacklab at a time, unless it somehow gets very late and we have a large enough crew to split up. I want us to take care of Carleton first, because we need to maintain access control to CRF through the end no matter what. --dkg PS when is the next orga team meeting? I plan to attend the OpenPGP key management BoF tomorrow evening before the KSP, so i'll be busy from 19:30 onwards, and i would like to attend the talks earlier in the day as well. So if folks want to have the localteam meeting in the evening, i will be unable to attend. I could do a lunch meeting at 13:00 in front of John Jay, but i understand that Lunch meetings tend to be relatively unproductive. OTOH, no meeting at all might also be considered unproductive. We didn't appear to reach a consensus on the next-meeting plan at today's meeting. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Bug#592170: please add debconf delegates to intro/organisation
On 08/09/2010 05:05 PM, Eric Dantan Rzewnicki wrote: > I've just gotten home and am probably going afk for some relaxation > soon. But, I wanted to point out that only a few members of the DC10 > localteam were active in the debian vs debconf discussion (event 658). > I hope that more of them can and will contribute to the September > discussion. I haven't yet watched any video of the BoF, as i'm currently taking care of other work. Could someone tell me where to find info on what i should be paying attention to in september? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] DebConf anti-harassment policy
On 12/02/2010 05:19 AM, Richard Darst wrote: > http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Conference_anti-harassment_policy > > What are your thoughts on adopting some sort of thing? I think it's a > good idea, and we can leave the adaptation and posting to some team > who takes it on and reports back to us. Thanks for bringing this up, Richard. I also think this is a good idea for DebConf. > It's important to consider that for DebConf, it takes more to make a > policy than just posting it on a web site. Since DebConf changes so > much each year, and isn't really run top-down, each year someone needs > to make sure that the policy isn't neglected and year-specific things > are updated somewhere. Yes, any adopted policy document for DebConf should be a per-year thing (e.g. "The DebConf 11 Anti-Harrassment Policy"), posted clearly and simply so that future years can adopt it explicitly into the Debconf N+1 policy, re-affirming it at each stage. > I think for DebConf it would make sense to have a well-respected, > trusted group, selected in the usual DebConf way of "who volunteers > that year and people approve of". We publicize a way of contacting > them and they can serve as an interface to the organizers that year > and the wider organization to make sure that disrespectful behavior > can be dealt with. As a concrete example (not applicable every year), > those on registration@ for DC10 could have served as a contact point > because most people there would have fit the "well-respected > established community members" mold. This sounds reasonable to me, though i wouldn't want to require that willingness to work on specific tasks (e.g. registration@ ) have to match completely with this role. People are more comfortable in some roles than in others, and i wouldn't want someone to feel they had to step down from registration because they couldn't handle being an anti-harassment liaison (or vice versa). > Just remember, there are many forms of harassment and disrespect, and > just because you haven't heard about instances doesn't mean that they > don't happen. Amen. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] DebConf Standards of Respect [was: Re: DebConf anti-harassment policy]
On 12/12/2010 06:06 PM, Martín Ferrari wrote: > that's just diluting what harassment means. This is perhaps why Richard re-titled the proposed policy "Standards of Respect", and not "anti-harrassment" (yes, the subject of the thread is different): http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/StandardsOfRespect > Also, what I read there would forbid stuff that happens in other kinds > of conferences: . Uh, there are also conferences devoted to white supremacy, and conferences devoted explicitly to how to market the latest proprietary software. People who want to go to those conferences can certainly go to them, but i'd rather not see those things be considered acceptable behavior for debconf. If someone started advocating, say, white supremacy at debconf, i would hope they would be told directly and firmly that this was not reasonable or acceptable for the conference, and that they should stop doing so or leave the conference. I'd rather the conference seem unwelcoming to a few bigots than seem unwelcoming to everyone who disagrees with white supremacy. > And in the end, what makes clothing sexualised? You're right -- there is no absolute distinction here, just as there are many unanswerable questions about what makes Debian work technically the right way. People who are attending and running the conference need to be aware of what makes potential participants feel unwelcome, and act on that. I do not buy the argument that just because lines are occasionally blurry, we should therefore not bother to encourage people to behave decently to one another in an event we are responsible for. > I have been suggested by a friend to > change my wallpaper in DC7 because she found it objectifying, and I > complied with the request on the grounds of not making anyone feel > bad; Exactly. It sounds like the person who felt your setup was in poor form was not so repulsed that she felt ok to talk to you about it directly. She talked to you, you heard her concerns, you were reasonable, and you remedied the situation. Therefore, neither of you needed to deal with any sort of policy. Had you been unreasonable about it (or had the image been so grossly repulsive that she was discouraged from even talking to you about it in the first place), the policy would be there to back up someone who was legitimately concerned about being made to feel unwelcome. > So, to conclude, I don't think it is a good idea to adopt this text. I disagree with your conclusion. Regards, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Definition of talk topic groups / sections / categories?
On 01/27/2011 07:34 PM, Richard Darst wrote: > Penta supports selecting both a "track" and a "event type" at the time > of submission. You can see the DC10 fields here: > https://penta.debconf.org/penta/submission/dc10/event/new > > I forget when the tracks were added... people on the talks team can > probably remember. I seem to remember taking some submissions, then > looking through and seeing what tracks would make sense, and then > trying to get more talks for what they thought were good tracks. > > I think the event types were pre-decided... I believe that DC9 used "tracks" to distinguish between debconf and debcamp events. IIRC, DC10 worked like this: * we decided not to put debcamp events into penta at all. * we made it so there were no track categories during the submission phase (and hacked penta to not display the track option during submission) * we pre-decided a list of "event types", and removed/hid the old ones that we didn't want any more (in particular, we wanted to remove "keynote") * as submissions came in, we looked at them and looked for recurrent themes. We also talked among the organizers to see if anyone had a particular interest that they wanted to really bring out. * from those themes and interests, we came up with the set of "tracks", and manually put some of the proposals into the tracks. most proposals were not in any track. * we looked for one or two "track coordinators" for each track -- these were people who were interested in the specifics of the track, knew the topic, and were expected to be reasonable about representing the different work going on. Some of these folks volunteered themselves directly. Others were sought out privately and asked to help out. * the track coordinators were expected to review existing submissions for their track, encourage the submitters to improve lackluster proposals, and encourage new submissions if they felt a part of the track was under-represented. They did *not* get to decide whether a given submission would be adopted into the fixed schedule, but could give their own recommendation to the talks team. * during scheduling, i tried to make it so that tracks that ended up with a coherent set of events were scheduled on a single day, in the same room with a contiguous block of time slots. I avoided having two tracks running at the same time. In spite of all the scheduling headaches and logistical hassles around scheduling, i was reasonably happy with how the tracks turned out. It meant that a few sub-communities within debian had a chance to have an intense day of related conversations, and to figure out plans and projects for the future. It also raised the visibility of those sub-communities a little bit. If the DC11 talks team has no opposition, i would recommend doing something similar this coming year. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] on talk duration, the LCA model (45 + 15 mins)
On 01/27/2011 08:41 PM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > being currently at LCA 2011 for the first time in my life, I'm > naturally inclined to look for best practices that we might want to > adopt for DebConf. > > Here is one: have talks slot of 45 minutes + 15 minutes of *break* > before the start of the next talk. I like this model more than the 1 > hour model we have at DebConf for various reasons: At dc10, we did 55 minutes + 5 minute breaks. The overwhelming consensus was that this was a serious mistake. Something like what zack is proposing (45+15) would have been much better. In addition to the good arguments zack made, i'll add one more: * time for the video team to actually take a bit of a break, rather than scrambling continuously between talks. Being on the video team is a strenuous job, and the video team does amazing work for 7 days in a row. Letting them do things like go to the bathroom or grab a snack seems like a friendly thing to do. Thanks, video team! And mea culpa for being one of the folks who settled on the 55+5 format of DC10. --dkg PS note also that you may want even longer breaks if the venues are geographically far apart. at DC10, the farthest distance between any two conference rooms could be covered in a couple minutes by most attendees. if we'd had space on the other end of campus, it would have been a different matter. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] error wiki.dc.org with https -> dc7
On 02/13/2011 02:25 PM, Joerg Jaspert wrote: >> report bug: >> http://wiki.debconf.org -> OK! >> https://wiki.debconf.org -> DC7 ? > > Not a bug, exactly as configured. > debconf7.debconf.org has same IP and its using ssl if the machine is running squeeze, we should be able to use SNI to provide name-based HTTP-over-TLS for SNI-capable clients. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Website related track at next DebConf
On 02/14/2011 02:44 PM, Martin Zobel-Helas wrote: > on the debian-www list we recently spoke about the idea to have a > website related track during DebConf. I don't think it need to be > directly only www.debian.org related, maybe name it "debian.org related > webservices" which can be everything from DDPO, DDP, PTS to wiki or > planet. My idea would be to also have some sort of round table or > discussion round at the end of that track (0.5h-1h or so). I think this is a great idea. Web-facing services provided by the project represent a large part of our public image, and also serve our goals of transparency and openness. Getting people to think and work actively on these things during debconf would be a really good thing. Thanks for proposing this, Martin. Would you be up for acting as a sort of "track coordinator" for this, encouraging talk submissions and making sure that the major debian-related webservices are all well-represented in the proposals? Or do you know someone who might be interested in coordinating such a track? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] svn repositories blog and reports moved
On 03/17/2011 07:46 PM, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > i just finished merging the blog and the reports svn into debconf-data > preserving their entire history. [...] > I set the old locations inaccessible, so noone can accidently commit or > work with them. Thanks, Joerg! Could you update http://www.debconf.org/resources.shtml to match the new information? --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Talk submission: Difference between "Submission notes" / "Abstract" / "Description"
On 04/14/2011 04:59 PM, Andreas Tille wrote: > I always wonder what the difference might be. For me the field > "Abstract" is clear. It should be mandatory. There might be some use > for "Submission notes" which can be filled with notes to clarify the > abstract or some other stuff but I usually leave it out. I agree with these interpretations of "Abstract" and "Notes". Notes in particular might be used for presentation logistical details like "i'll need an amplified sound system with an 1/8" stereo audio input jack" or "I explicitly do not want video-team coverage for this talk". > I never made any sense out of this Description field. So *if* it has > any sense it definitely needs some footnote or some explanation > somewhere else. Otherwise it should be removed (if it is not yet to > late because people filled in some content). Last year, i used "Description" as a long-form place to describe the talk in more detail. Other people appear to have done the same. So while "Abstract" is usually a one (or two, at most) paragraph description, Description might include an entire talk outline. Having the Abstract makes it possible to prepare a reasonably-sized printed schedule that includes more than the title for each work (though i don't know if anyone really needs such a schedule). Given that the full Description is probably not viewed by most people, the main advantage of it is that people can use it to give the talks team a clearer picture of the talk itself and the level of preparation of the submitter. This may or may not be useful enough to warrant keeping it around. I would be OK with hiding the description field, if no one has a strong argument for keeping it around. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] propostal web watch debconf11 with html5
On 05/12/2011 02:58 AM, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > It is fine if people use facebook/twitter/flickr/youtube/whatever to > promote DebConf. If it is clear they are doing it on their own, it is > NOT DebConf (or Debian) doing it. > > But our website should NOT ever include a non-free service. Either there > is a free one, then link/use that, or DebConf provides its own. One of > the two. If none works, then leave a feature out of the website. > > (That also includes any kind of JS or whatever which might be > included. Either we legally can distribute it, or we should not have it) > > Sorry, but we are a free conference, promoting free and open - not > closed-source stuff. I wholeheartedly agree with Joerg here. Debian is about freedom. There is already more than enough pressure on people to submit to joining centralized, non-free, corporate gatekeepers of culture and communications. We should make sure that our work does not encourage or support this kind of behavior. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] Social Networking and Dc11 Old: propostal web watch debconf11 with html5
On 05/12/2011 11:13 AM, ValessioBrito wrote: > Is not it important to monitor and encourage DebConf comments within > these networks? If you want to spend time on those networks, no one will stop you :) However, the minute debian requires me to agree to the terms of service of any of the groups you mentioned (which is a requirement to participate and give feedback there, afaict, with the possible exception of identi.ca) is the minute i stop being a debian developer. > The first step is the conscientization; And who is already addicted to > the consumption of "Drug"; remains the only "harm reduction", do > understand that the more an individual uses is closed things worse for > him. We must therefore participate within those networks of a group > discussion process, calling for alternative networks. Pragmatically, a mix of strategies is probably worth doing. But please remember metcalfe's law [0]. Your participation in a proprietary network contributes to the value held by the proprietor, and increases their ability to attract and exploit others. Time and effort you spend contributing to a proprietary network is time and effort you don't spend contributing to a free and open global communications network. > We must not allow anyone to comment on Debian DebConf or wrongly. eh? I have no interest in stopping people from commenting on debconf, rightly or wrongly. If someone wants to claim (on facebook or elsewhere) that debconf is a conference of magical ponies, i plan on shrugging and moving on. > Monitor the transmission and comments about them realiazada on > Facebook and other networks, is important for anyone draw the wrong > conclusions about what was said. At most, i'd hope that any "official" debian commentary that takes place within proprietary networks would be to point the discussion to free forums where conversation can take place without non-free corporate gatekeepers. Regards, --dkg [0] https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] debconf11 schedule
On 05/23/2011 11:16 AM, Holger Levsen wrote: > Tuesday, 26th, Groupphoto at 15oo(?), Cheese+Wine party in the evening Is there a specific reason (lighting, location, etc?) to choose 15:00 for the group photo? in earlier discussion within the talk , we had talked about having it right after lunch, and there was a goal of trying to have it on the day with the most people (based on stated intended arrival/departure times). If there are other constraints for this particular event (or any other scheduled event), it would be good to explain and detail those constraints in the penta entry: https://penta.debconf.org/penta/pentabarf/event/729 Thanks for firming up the schedule! Regards, --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] some problems with the videos
On 05/23/2011 01:54 PM, Marcelo Gutierrez wrote: > 2011/5/21 Ross Boylan > >> https://penta.debconf.org/dc9_schedule/events/392.en.html has this link >> to the high quality video: >> >> http://meetings-archive.debian.net/pub/debian-meetings/2009/debconf9/high/904_Quality_Assurance_BOF.ogv >> That doesn't work for me; the image is completely mangled. I tried >> kaffeine and gxine under KDE on Lenny. i386 architecture. >> > They both work great in here!! Xubuntu 1004 :$ The ogv link also works for me with vlc 1.1.7-3 on debian testing, i386. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
[Debconf-team] A records or CNAMES for www. prefix [was: Magazine Ad is ready!]
On 06/06/2011 10:26 AM, Leandro Gómez wrote: > 2011/6/6 Martin Zobel-Helas > >> zobel@marra:~% host www.debconf11.debconf.org >> Host www.debconf11.debconf.org not found: 3(NXDOMAIN) > > Right. It should be http://debconf11.debconf.org. Thank you! Thanks for catching this, Martin, and for fixing it, Leandro. Perhaps we should create the www.debconf11.debconf.org A record (or a CNAME) as well (and add the appropriate HTTP 302 redirect back to the correct hostname). It irks me to even recommend this, but I know there are a lot of people who seem to believe that you have to type "www" to get to a web site; given that we can make things work for those (confused) people as well, we probably should. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
Re: [Debconf-team] [Debconf11-localteam] Network equipment
On 06/08/2011 06:18 AM, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi Marinko, > > On Mittwoch, 8. Juni 2011, Marinko Tarlac wrote: >> It would be nice if you can provide a small list which eq. exactly do we >> need. > > 10-15 APs, same models and running OpenWRT prefered :-) I believe Brian Gupta (here in NY) has access to the wifi routers we used (or tried to use) in DC10. I'll be coming at the start of debcamp this year, and could get them from Brian and take them with me when i travel, if that would be useful. Brian, can you give any more details about the quantity/make/model of the devices? My memory does not serve me well here. --dkg signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ Debconf-team mailing list Debconf-team@lists.debconf.org http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
