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.
> The only issue I've seen that might be a problem is the suggestion that > the video team may not be able to cope with 3 talk streams going on. It > would be good if someone could confirm that's not a problem, but in the > absence of yelling I'm going to assume that this is doable. Please wait for a formal answer from them, it will be much clearer. I have just requested Carl to comment. > So I think this rough format is what we should try for DC 14. It's not > going to keep everyone happy, but takes on board a range of > considerations that have been mentioned. I've emailed the venue to try > and get some meal times nailed down and will follow up when I've done > so. OK. But, even after your explanation, and the others' input: I feel the proposed format effectively cuts the conference to three days, reinstating a three day long soft-DebCamp (with very few BoF slots around). During DebConf, we usually carry a wholly-packed schedule for the full length of the conference (five/six days). Cutting it back to only three days of talks, with 3:1 concurrency... Does not feel very nice to me. I would prefer having a full two-room schedule, with a potentially empty room for scheduling ad-hoc BoF sessions. And people that want to devote time to hacking can, of course, take advantage of the "sprints" feature. I understand the rationale for pushing this change. But, on pushing it while back-pedaling? :( _______________________________________________ Debconf-team mailing list [email protected] http://lists.debconf.org/mailman/listinfo/debconf-team
