On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 9:11 PM, Richard Hartmann
wrote:
> I took the opportunity to open a new vote with Concordet and the new options.
If you (re)vote, please make a full list as my online tool can't use
partial ones.
Thanks,
Richard
___
Debconf-team
I won't argue more on this, as it will start becoming a flamewar if we
don't control ourselves ;-) Whether or not we are having a DebCamp
should already be decided, and we should work based on that. So I
won't fan the bug/regression flames anymore. And please, I invite the
others to do likewise.
>
Carl Karsten dijo [Mon, May 26, 2014 at 06:16:45PM -0500]:
> As the new Video team lead, (no worries Holger is still here)
>
> Do we need to ask the presenter permission to email them things like
> "please review your title slide: http://...png"; and later "your video is
> here: http://";
I
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Carl Karsten wrote:
> Do we need to ask the presenter permission to email them things like "please
> review your title slide: http://...png"; and later "your video is here:
> http://";
I know what you are getting at and with half a video hat on I
_strongly_ su
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 09:58:29PM +0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
>> So, I think these numbers are very misleading, and should not be used at
>> this point for planning. At least until the reconfirmation period.
>
> So we shouldn't plan w
As the new Video team lead, (no worries Holger is still here)
Do we need to ask the presenter permission to email them things like
"please review your title slide: http://...png"; and later "your video is
here: http://";
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Ana Guerrero Lopez wrote:
> On We
On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 09:42:38AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Forwarding to the list for general consumption.
> From: René Mayorga
> To: vor...@debian.org
> Cc: ta...@debconf.org
> Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 09:02:42 -0600
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> As we promise to forward you the fields/changes for
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 10:02:58PM +0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> On 21/05/14 02:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > are coming as "volunteers". The format this year has been deliberately
> > designed to improve upon the status quo, with the explicit understanding
> > that people who are actually coming
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 09:58:29PM +0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> On 21/05/14 02:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > FYI, we do have some data already about this, namely the arrival/departure
> > dates that sponsored attendees have entered when registering. For each
> > night of sponsored accommodation,
On 25/05/14 00:22, Steve Langasek wrote:
> If the only way they're interested in coming to DebConf is to have a week's
> vacation at Debian's expense, then I don't see a problem here.
I also find this kind of assumption disturbing. Please, stop talking
about DebCamp attendees in this way, it is n
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 09:58:29PM +0200, Martín Ferrari wrote:
> On 21/05/14 02:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > FYI, we do have some data already about this, namely the arrival/departure
> > dates that sponsored attendees have entered when registering. For each
> > night of sponsored accommodation,
Another thing on this email...
On 21/05/14 02:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> But it's possible that the other space won't be available to us at this
> point, in which case we are still limited to 200 for the plenaries and
> therefore there's no advantage to *not* having them on the first and last
>
On 21/05/14 02:45, Steve Langasek wrote:
> FYI, we do have some data already about this, namely the arrival/departure
> dates that sponsored attendees have entered when registering. For each
> night of sponsored accommodation, we have:
>
> Date | # sponsored
> ---|
>
On Sat, May 17, 2014 at 01:34:58PM -0700, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> It doesn't look like we yet have a shape for how the days should be laid
> out over the conference. Steve put forward a strawman in
>
> http://lists.debconf.org/lurker/message/20131001.175026.0a50b91b.en.html
>
> and AJ countere
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 7:58 PM, Penny Leach wrote:
> Since 10 (& now 11) are both remixes rather than new logos I'm happy to
> add them to the voting table if people think it's reasonable.
I took the opportunity to open a new vote with Concordet and the new options.
Penny: Feel free to delete
On 26/05/2014 17:42, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> I consider 4 & 5 the best, but wasn't truly happy with either of them.
> I realized _why_ and mixed the good parts.
>
> As I was after the deadline, I didn't just want to change the voting
> page, though.
Since 10 (& now 11) are both remixes rather t
On Sun, May 25, 2014 at 12:02:34AM +0200, gregor herrmann wrote:
> FWIW: I'm quite happy that the German team is going to fix what I
> consider a grave bug.
> (Just saying to support the DC15 team, not wanting to interfer with
> DC14.)
And so it begins.
--
-
On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Penny Leach wrote:
> As to your logo, not sure what we should do about that. What did you
> intend by adding it to the overview?
I consider 4 & 5 the best, but wasn't truly happy with either of them.
I realized _why_ and mixed the good parts.
As I was after the
On 26/05/2014 11:46, Richard Hartmann wrote:
> Can we do concordet instead of single-vote? There are online tools
> like [1] so there's no need for devotee or similarly complex
> workflows.
As I said on irc (repeating here for good measure) I can't get onto this
until at least tomorrow. I also do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Hello team,
A quick update on where we are and next steps.
We are mostly done with the ranking/scoring, but we are a little
bit behind the schedule. This Monday (2014-05-26) I will finish
the review of our scores and the Bursaries will discuss the
Dear all,
Can we do concordet instead of single-vote? There are online tools
like [1] so there's no need for devotee or similarly complex
workflows.
Also, I know that this is too late, but I threw another hat in the
round. It's a mix of 4 and 5; I filed it under 10 but only added it to
the overv
Dear all,
Can we do concordet instead of single-vote? There are online tools
like [1] so there's no need for devotee or similarly complex
workflows.
Also, I know that this is too late, but I threw another hat in the
round. It's a mix of 4 and 5; I filed it under 10 but only added it to
the overv
22 matches
Mail list logo
