On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 11:06:45AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Possibly a proper wording would be "pre-scheduled/scheduled on
> site"... Although that's also not precisely true.
How about "prioritised / best-effort"? (s/ised/ized/ next year, or use
"priority" instead both years.)
- Jimmy Kaplowit
Hi,
On Sonntag, 28. Juni 2009, Richard Darst wrote:
> The
> main/only benefits to being "Official" are pre-planned, advertised to
> attendees slightly more, and videoed, right ?
no. we will "video" everything in the two main rooms, and nothing in the bof
rooms and nothing which isnt scheduled in
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 08:55:25AM +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 01:56:48PM -0400, Richard Darst wrote:
> > I'd say that Open Day selection people should also be able to mark
> > things as "official", then.
>
> Since several DebConfs I wonder whether we should change this
>
Hi.
On Samstag, 27. Juni 2009, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Possibly a proper wording would be "pre-scheduled/scheduled on
> > site"... Although that's also not precisely true.
> IMHO (pre-)scheduled is not much better because we also schedule
> these currently "unofficial" events.
featured/non-featu
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 11:06:45AM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Umh, I agree we should find a clearer wording - But I don't think it
> means sponsored/not sponsored.
Sore. I do not insist on the sponsoring wording it was just a
quick shot I've got in my mind. If anybody finds a more apropriate
wo
Andreas Tille dijo [Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 08:55:25AM +0200]:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 01:56:48PM -0400, Richard Darst wrote:
> > I'd say that Open Day selection people should also be able to mark
> > things as "official", then.
>
> Since several DebConfs I wonder whether we should change this
>
>
On Sat, Jun 27, 2009 at 10:47:05AM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote:
> > spnsored / not sponsored
> > to express what we *really* mean. It always confuses people what
> > the distinction between official and unofficial means.
>
> +1
>
> And I think we can+should still do this for DebConf9.
If the t
Hi,
On Samstag, 27. Juni 2009, Andreas Tille wrote:
> Since several DebConfs I wonder whether we should change this
> official / unofficial
> branding into
> spnsored / not sponsored
> to express what we *really* mean. It always confuses people what
> the distinction between official and unof
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 01:56:48PM -0400, Richard Darst wrote:
> I'd say that Open Day selection people should also be able to mark
> things as "official", then.
Since several DebConfs I wonder whether we should change this
official / unofficial
branding into
spnsored / not sponsored
to ex
Hi,
On Donnerstag, 4. Juni 2009, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> One possible solution is to have them all interruptranslated (i.e. the
> speaker and the translator say a phrase at a time). We could, if the
> facilities are OK for that, sit people in two different rooms, and
> have a simultaneous translation
Christian Perrier dijo [Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 07:12:09AM +0200]:
> We'll probably end up with a mix. What I would really strongly insist
> on is for people who would give their talks in English and are native
> speakers to make a great effort to be as intelligible as possible
> (speak sloowly, a
Quoting Bdale Garbee (bd...@gag.com):
> I personally think DebianDay is a great time for the program to be
> single-tracked, avoiding parallel sessions. It would be good if at
> least some of the talks are in whatever the native language is, but
> talks of high quality from competent speakers may
Bdale Garbee dijo [Wed, Jun 03, 2009 at 02:46:40PM -0600]:
> DebianDay talks should be more 'planned' and/or 'structured' than the
> rest of Debconf needs to be. For Debconf, it's completely ok for there
> to be talks on many different semi-random topics of interest to DDs
> sprinkled throughout t
On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 10:17 +0200, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:18:04PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> > DebianDay talks should definitively be considered official. Of course,
>
> I agree here and wonder whether we should rerate these candidates
> which might have been off the o
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 11:18:04PM -0500, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> DebianDay talks should definitively be considered official. Of course,
I agree here and wonder whether we should rerate these candidates
which might have been off the official DebConf programm.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
htt
Quoting Margarita Manterola (margamanter...@gmail.com):
> Hi!
>
> I'm not in the talks committee, so I felt it was not my place to do
> the actual selection, but I went through the talks list and selected
> those that I thought were best suited for Open Day, here's a list with
> event id and title
Richard Darst dijo [Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 01:56:48PM -0400]:
> I'd say that Open Day selection people should also be able to mark
> things as "official", then.
>
> As a side note, I noticed how all of {"advertisement" via in published
> proceedings/printed schedule, video recording, travel sponsors
Gunnar Wolf dijo [Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 10:41:55PM -0500]:
> Agree - what should we use for this? The track? We currently have only
> three listed talks on the DebianDay track, so it might be quite
> doable. Now, I just checked and I don't seem to have access anymore to
> the talk rating interface —
Margarita Manterola dijo [Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 05:04:32PM -0300]:
> The basic idea behind the Open DebConf Day was to select the talks
> that would be interesting both to DDs and non-DDs, so that we could
> invite Debian users, contributors or interested people to that day in
> particular.
>
> For
Hi,
On Dienstag, 2. Juni 2009, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> Open Day _IS_ DebConf proper.
[emphasize.]
> So, it's not grounds for exclusion.
> However, if the talk requires the audience to know "insider" Debian
> stuff, then it shouldn't be during Open Day.
I dont think those three talks Luk
On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Luk Claes wrote:
>> 382 - QEMU for Debian Developers
>
> I thought Open Day was meant for a wider audience than DDs? I fear that
> this one might be rather technical.
Ok.
>> 412 - Debian on Network Storage Devices and Other Devices
> I think this one is rather te
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 01:56:48PM -0400, Richard Darst wrote:
> I'd say that Open Day selection people should also be able to mark
> things as "official", then.
>
> As a side note, I noticed how all of {"advertisement" via in published
> proceedings/printed schedule, video recording, travel spons
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 01:31:56PM -0400, Jimmy Kaplowitz wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:08:09PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> > Apart from this, I've seen a number of "rejected" talks which were
> > marked "DebConf Unofficial"... Why were they rejected?
>
> We were only marking as "acc
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:08:09PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> Apart from this, I've seen a number of "rejected" talks which were
> marked "DebConf Unofficial"... Why were they rejected?
We were only marking as "accepted" those talks which deserved the official
status of being in the prepl
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 07:24:07PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote:
> > 412 - Debian on Network Storage Devices and Other Devices
>
> I think this one is rather technical, it would be a shame if it was not
> in DebConf proper IMHO.
>
> > 398 - Debian and the Openmoko FreeRunner: one year later
>
> I thi
On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:08:09PM -0300, Margarita Manterola wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm not in the talks committee, so I felt it was not my place to do
> the actual selection, but I went through the talks list and selected
> those that I thought were best suited for Open Day, here's a list with
> event
Margarita Manterola wrote:
> I'm not in the talks committee, so I felt it was not my place to do
> the actual selection, but I went through the talks list and selected
> those that I thought were best suited for Open Day, here's a list with
> event id and title:
I'm not even part of the Orga Team
Hi!
I'm not in the talks committee, so I felt it was not my place to do
the actual selection, but I went through the talks list and selected
those that I thought were best suited for Open Day, here's a list with
event id and title:
382 - QEMU for Debian Developers
371 - immunity: securing untrust
Hi!
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:55 AM, Richard Darst wrote:
> Who else knows how Open Debian Day is being run / what else do we need
> to do for it at this point ?
The basic idea behind the Open DebConf Day was to select the talks
that would be interesting both to DDs and non-DDs, so that we coul
29 matches
Mail list logo
