#debconf-team Meeting
Meeting started by dkg at 23:07:15 UTC
(full logs).
Meeting summary
- What are the options for being less offical short of a BoF (dkg, 23:12:55)
- What are the options for being less offical short of a BoF? (dkg, 23:12:57)
- terminology: what do we call talks or BoFs that are not "accepted"? (dkg, 23:15:55)
- AGREED: "accepted"
and "rejected" will basically mean "will be pre-scheduled in a main
room" and "will not be pre-scheduled in a main room" (dkg,
23:34:30)
- http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Meetings#talks_team_meeting_Wednesday_2010-05-026_23:00UTC__.287pm_NYC_time.29
(micah,
23:35:10)
- review process: relevance, actuality, acceptance (dkg, 23:35:23)
- (dkg,
23:35:29)
- http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Meetings#talks_team_meeting_Wednesday_2010-05-026_23:00UTC__.287pm_NYC_time.29
(dkg,
23:35:30)
- http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/DebConf10/Meetings#talks_team_meeting_Wednesday_2010-05-026_23:00UTC__.287pm_NYC_time.29
(dkg,
23:35:37)
- AGREED: "actuality"
should be interpreted as "speaker seems to know the topic and (as
far as i know) is capable of presenting it" (dkg,
23:45:47)
- review process: scoring calculation concerns (dkg, 23:48:02)
- ACTION: dkg will look
into a bugfix for penta scoring, in particular for "don't
know" (dkg,
23:50:07)
- review process -- what works well, what doesn't? (dkg, 23:52:43)
- azeem suggests adding a section on
http://wiki.debconf.org/wiki/Pentabarf about UI suggestions for
improving the rating process (dkg,
23:57:04)
- review process: disagreements? (dkg, 23:58:05)
- ACTION: micah will
write a note to debconf-team about his view of relevance
(dkg,
00:01:43)
- useful UI would highlight wide
divergence (dkg,
00:03:15)
- would be nice to have import/export and
facilitate offline work (dkg,
00:04:07)
- review: contacting people (dkg, 00:04:25)
- when contacting a submitter, add a note on the
rating tab about how you followed up, and cc talks@debconf
(dkg,
00:06:21)
- would be good to have a way to flag proposals
as "pending followup" (dkg,
00:07:53)
- for track-relevant talks, follow up with track
coordinator (dkg,
00:09:04)
- cut process: terminology (dkg, 00:09:37)
- we are just going to say "pre-scheduled for a
slot in the main rooms" (dkg,
00:10:11)
- cut process: 72 talks overall? (dkg, 00:10:22)
- proposal details can be changed at any
time (dkg,
00:17:09)
- no more d-d-a calls for late talk submissions,
but personal contacts or outreach are fine and encouraged
(dkg,
00:20:20)
- cut process: evening/after-hours events (dkg, 00:20:49)
- there are a reasonable number of
evening/after-hours events. we can probably have one per
evening. (dkg,
00:27:17)
- ACTION: ask venue
team about insurance issues (dkg,
00:29:06)
- https://penta.debconf.org/penta/pentabarf/event/561
(dkg,
00:31:23)
- https://penta.debconf.org/penta/pentabarf/event/561
(micah,
00:31:28)
- AGREED: we do not
want to accept events that incur additional insurance costs beyond
what we're already paying to columbia (dkg,
00:32:20)
- ACTION: micah will
follow up with submitter of event 561 about insurance/etc
(dkg,
00:34:07)
- cut process: do we want to have a single all-conference event each day? (dkg, 00:34:30)
- MrBeige points out that an all-conference
plenary is logistically problematic (dkg,
00:42:50)
- plenary could accomodate more with
video-team-supported spillover in small room (dkg,
00:46:19)
- ACTION: dkg will
submit a wrapup event with track reportbacks, BSP prizes, bosnia
presentation (dkg,
00:50:31)
- ACTION: biella will
suggest that mako submit a proposal (dkg,
01:02:46)
- we are not agreed on whether we want a daily
plenary (dkg,
01:03:33)
- ACTION: dkg will
re-open plenary question on debconf-team@ (dkg,
01:04:19)
- cut process: how to notify people of a decision (dkg, 01:04:31)
- mrbeige will write a script to notify of
decisions once we have them (dkg,
01:10:02)
- accept the top X, reject the bottom Y, and
schedule a time to discuss the middle individually for 30-60s
each (dkg,
01:10:29)
- but someone draft the various texts to say on
whiteboard (MrBeige,
01:10:36)
- neeed followup should happen today or
tomorrow (dkg,
01:15:41)
- claim a talk for followup in the ratings tab,
then follow up and cc talks@debconf.org (dkg,
01:17:36)
- AGREED: claim a talk
for followup in the ratings tab, then follow up and cc
talks@debconf.org (dkg,
01:17:41)
- AGREED: all should
send a handful of followups for the needed talks in the next two
days (dkg,
01:18:10)
- particular talks: outstanding concerns (dkg, 01:19:07)
- talks team folks should feel comfortable
raising private concerns about individual talks on
talks@debconf (dkg,
01:22:09)
- tracks: quick review of existing tracks (dkg, 01:22:43)
- AGREED: followup/outreach should specially target talks
proposed for track inclusion (dkg,
01:31:12)
- ACTION: DrDub_ will
make a point of keeping the other track coordinators in the loop on
how their talks are faring (dkg,
01:31:47)
- ACTION: dkg will also
make a point of keeping the other track coordinators in the loop on
how their talks are faring (dkg,
01:32:05)
- ACTION: azeem will
follow up on science talks (dkg,
01:33:54)
- ACTION: azeem will
follow up on talks@debconf about science-on-debian (dkg,
01:38:50)
- AGREED: if a pattern
emerges, and a coordinator steps up, we can still put together a
track (dkg,
01:42:57)
- scheduling (dkg, 01:46:33)
- the date on
http://debconf10.debconf.org/dates.xhtml for "Publication date for
official schedule" looks unrealistic (dkg,
01:48:08)
- next steps (dkg, 01:49:39)
- ACTION: dkg will
follow up on debconf-team@ to see what the scheduling plan is
(dkg,
01:50:15)
- ACTION: DrDub_ will
e-mail about followup meeting a week from now (probably on June
2nd (dkg,
01:55:36)
Meeting ended at 01:56:15 UTC
(full logs).
Action items
- dkg will look into a bugfix for penta scoring, in particular for "don't know"
- micah will write a note to debconf-team about his view of relevance
- ask venue team about insurance issues
- micah will follow up with submitter of event 561 about insurance/etc
- dkg will submit a wrapup event with track reportbacks, BSP prizes, bosnia presentation
- biella will suggest that mako submit a proposal
- dkg will re-open plenary question on debconf-team@
- DrDub_ will make a point of keeping the other track coordinators in the loop on how their talks are faring
- dkg will also make a point of keeping the other track coordinators in the loop on how their talks are faring
- azeem will follow up on science talks
- azeem will follow up on talks@debconf about science-on-debian
- dkg will follow up on debconf-team@ to see what the scheduling plan is
- DrDub_ will e-mail about followup meeting a week from now (probably on June 2nd
Action items, by person
- azeem
- azeem will follow up on science talks
- azeem will follow up on talks@debconf about science-on-debian
- biella
- biella will suggest that mako submit a proposal
- dkg
- dkg will look into a bugfix for penta scoring, in particular for "don't know"
- dkg will submit a wrapup event with track reportbacks, BSP prizes, bosnia presentation
- dkg will re-open plenary question on debconf-team@
- dkg will also make a point of keeping the other track coordinators in the loop on how their talks are faring
- dkg will follow up on debconf-team@ to see what the scheduling plan is
- DrDub
- DrDub_ will make a point of keeping the other track coordinators in the loop on how their talks are faring
- DrDub_ will e-mail about followup meeting a week from now (probably on June 2nd
- DrDub_
- DrDub_ will make a point of keeping the other track coordinators in the loop on how their talks are faring
- DrDub_ will e-mail about followup meeting a week from now (probably on June 2nd
- micah
- micah will write a note to debconf-team about his view of relevance
- micah will follow up with submitter of event 561 about insurance/etc
People present (lines said)
- dkg (363)
- azeem (173)
- micah (146)
- DrDub_ (137)
- DrDub (36)
- MrBeige (32)
- edrz (29)
- gwolf (22)
- biella_ (19)
- biella (14)
- jeremyb (5)
- moray (4)
- MeetBot (4)
- blarson (4)
- Clint (3)
- sapphire (1)
- azeem_ (1)
Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.