Hi,
On Sonntag, 20. März 2011, Moray Allan wrote:
> As said elsewhere, it should come down (at worst) to a non-private
> vote using Debian's standard procedures.
I'm not sure you are referred to this, but I consider the irc meeting where I
brought this up sarcastically as one of the worsts mom
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> How does this comitee decide? (I think we are getting there, I just want to
> point out that "the comitee decides" is just slightly better than "a decision
> is made". Both are too unspecific and lack details, like
> timelines+timelimits.)
A
Hi,
coming late to this party... :)
On Donnerstag, 2. Dezember 2010, Moray Allan wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:23 PM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> > - "A decision is made." sums up my main issue quite well -- it's not
> > specified who takes the decision and how it's taken.
> This is a clear fl
Hi,
On Mittwoch, 16. März 2011, Moray Allan wrote:
> DebConf venue bid process (draft 3)
in short: /me likes! Thanks _a lot_ for working on this. I'm really happy
about how well this process is already defined, even with the shortcomings
there still are. But in general, this is really good and
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 07:01:00PM +, Moray Allan wrote:
> Here is a further draft of the decision process, again updated to take
> into account people's comments.
>
> Those with little time should use their email client's search function
> and start reading at the paragraph "For the decision
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> I feel that a source of work duplication is that bidding venues go too
> much into detail because of not knowing what they should work on for
> each of the steps - This is, as an example, it's quite hard to get
> good, final prices from hotels
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> I feel that a source of work duplication is that bidding venues go too
> much into detail because of not knowing what they should work on for
> each of the steps - This is, as an example, it's quite hard to get
> good, final prices from hotels
Moray Allan dijo [Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 07:01:00PM +]:
> Here is a further draft of the decision process, again updated to take
> into account people's comments.
Thanks a lot for preparing this draft. It feels like every year we are
having the same discussion... And hopefully putting it in a co
Here is a further draft of the decision process, again updated to take
into account people's comments.
Those with little time should use their email client's search function
and start reading at the paragraph "For the decision meeting, bid
teams prepare:" -- the initial stages have already taken
Hi,
On Dienstag, 18. Januar 2011, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> I'm sorry that I've been silent and away from a lot of Debian/DebConf
> mailing lists due to work issues.
Same here.
> > (http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/LocationCheckList). Bids should be
[...]
> However, I think it's not fruitful
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:05:40AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> A couple of details that remain to be settled are: the number of chairs
> (I suggest 3) and the actual names. Since they are going to be delegates
> I reserve the right to make the final decision, but I would appreciate
> propos
And now that I've reemerged from under my rock, I have one concern that I
would like to provide before any delegations are made to this:
On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 10:05:40AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 03:19:21PM +, Moray Allan wrote:
> > While much of this proposa
Hi all!
I'm sorry that I've been silent and away from a lot of Debian/DebConf
mailing lists due to work issues. I hope I'm still on time to express
my opinion on this matter.
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Moray Allan wrote:
> Here is a new draft bid process with minor modifications based on
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 03:19:21PM +, Moray Allan wrote:
> While much of this proposal should be uncontroversial, I would
> definitely like to see some comments on the delegation aspect:
Sorry for the delay. I comment below on the delegation aspect.
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Moray All
While much of this proposal should be uncontroversial, I would
definitely like to see some comments on the delegation aspect:
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:28 PM, Moray Allan wrote:
> - DPL delegates DebConf Committee Chairs to lead the DebConf organising
> process
>
> - Committee Chairs recruit addi
Here is a new draft bid process with minor modifications based on
comments in this thread. While this is now a suggestion rather than
mere description, it's not intended to be a rigid set of rules.
Please read it and make suggestions for improvements!
This bid process presupposes a couple of new
On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> I believe you provided an excellent argument in your previous mail in
> favor of (b): people should feel they own a decision or, i.e. that
> they'll have to live up with the consequences of their own choice.
I was hoping someone might
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 01:34:44PM +, Moray Allan wrote:
> Supposing that a group of people were delegated by the DPL to run the
> venue bid decision process (including making a final decision if
> consensus doesn't get there first), do people think:
>
> (a) they should be delegated solely for
Supposing that a group of people were delegated by the DPL to run the
venue bid decision process (including making a final decision if
consensus doesn't get there first), do people think:
(a) they should be delegated solely for the venue bid process,
or
(b) they should be delegated as DebConfN c
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Richard Darst wrote:
> So, my idea is: Select some experienced debconfers from Debian (not
> the current active DebConf team) and allow them to make the decision.
> These people should be well-respected within Debian, have attended
> many debconf, and perhaps been
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 04:43:59PM +, Moray Allan wrote:
> Hopefully then we can generate some documentation on the status quo,
> and some ideas for how to do things better!
I have been thinking about some sort of different way to do things.
Here's what I thought up. The basic idea is "when
On Fri, Dec 03, 2010 at 02:07:44PM +0100, Alexander Reichle-Schmehl wrote:
> Hmmm... We once had delegates to make a venue decision of DC7. You
> might remember it, including it's outcome ;)
>
> If there's interest (and someone reminds me) I can try to summarize some
> of the experiences I made b
Hi!
Am 02.12.2010 23:03, schrieb Moray Allan:
> The obvious resolution would be to give an appropriate group an
> official DPL delegation for choosing the venue. As delegates they
> should still follow the precedent of looking for consensus, but a
> delegation would add clarity over who has the
On Thu, Dec 02, 2010 at 10:03:46PM +, Moray Allan wrote:
> > - "A decision is made." sums up my main issue quite well -- it's not
> > specified who takes the decision and how it's taken.
>
> This is a clear flaw in the current process. In the past when the
> answer has not been clear (no con
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:23 PM, gregor herrmann wrote:
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:43:59 +, Moray Allan wrote:
>> (b) what improvements we could make to the process in the future.
>> - Venue decision meeting 2:
>>[...]
> These stages worked quite well in my experience.
Yes, but I'd suggest we as
On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:43:59 +, Moray Allan wrote:
(Outsider point of view following.)
> (a) where there are mistakes and significant gaps in the summary,
> compared to what really happened in previous years;
IMO your summary describes quite well what happened in the last
years.
> (b) what
This message tries to summarise the existing DebConf bid
process/decision process. I would like you all to think about:
(a) where there are mistakes and significant gaps in the summary,
compared to what really happened in previous years;
(b) what improvements we could make to the process in the
27 matches
Mail list logo
