Re: BSP Reimbursements
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi Debianites On 2019/10/02 16:43, Sam Hartman wrote: > TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of > batching together travel reimbursement requests. > > HI. A while back, I suspended the automatic approval of reimbursement s > for attending BSPs. You can still ask for approval for attending a > BSP, you can't just send me a reimbursement request with no approval. > > We had a bit of discussion about how things ought to/might work here. > Holger proposed that it would make more sense for the people running > BSPs to batch approvals kind of like we do for sprints and > mini-DebConfs. > > If we want to do things that way, no action is required on my part. I > am very willing to approve such budgets, and even to amend such budget s > if it looks like more people are coming. But I do actually want to se e > them ahead of time, just so I know what's going on. > > So, if we're generally happy with BSP organizers putting together a > travel budget and handling who will get reimbursed, then I think the > next step is to write up how to do that on the wiki. > I'd appreciate it if someone would volunteer to do that. > If you get text together, please drop treasu...@debian.org a note aski ng > for review (that also reaches me). > > Asking BSP organizers to help with this is great from the DPL side. > The only concern is if it pushes the effort involved in organizing a > BSP up too much so people don't want to do it. > > If that ends up being the case I'm happy with some sort of automatic > approval process for DDs attending BSPs (and easy approval for other > contributors when that makes sense). > But let's figure out if we want BSP organizers to handle this first. Not sure exactly what bearing this email still has. As far as I understand it, this affected the policy of the DPL at the time based on current circumstances. It was not coded into any policy or in any procedures. However, since some feel that the above is still in affect, let me take this opportunity to state that any implications that the above email had on reimbursement policy no longer has any effect whatsoever. Having said that, I actually agree with Sam that we need better policies around this. Moray and myself are looking at rebooting a local team support/help/bootstrapping/admin/etc group, which may well be a delegation, and on top of that, might also take on some responsibilities for local team budgets and approving certain kinds of expenditures (like BSPs). If you're interested in helping shape that, and especially if you're active in a local team already, then please join our BoF session at DebConf20: https://debconf20.debconf.org/talks/50-local-teams/ - -Jonathan, Debian Project Leader - -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ Jonathan Carter (highvoltage) ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ https://wiki.debian.org/highvoltage ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ https://debian.org | https://jonathancarter.org ⠈⠳⣄ Debian, the universal operating system. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEExyA8CpIGcL+U8AuxsB0acqyNyaEFAl81Z60ACgkQsB0acqyN yaHG0xAAvkhXBaSOMZ3U4ztkS5Pk84TtOH7lAjvf8CDKvPx7AS64e7668aWCHA5o uEXW37adRDuHulQqW1rCMe1coGzRuIE2JQHwnGPno+5HlR4uL/x58sgnTwDmLCr4 YKS+A3e11gWBWbKcpsBrWBLpDa0zlluzNZL76JhIZOo0xxBD80g0xo/OgeogDwul sb4OKM0oAJJ3n8Dk7YyR7Ulpo+kDnKvY2MyB6prmum4tKPXdfhnsf8giSAxg6qK5 px6pppfvRLflLsOxjG4klJ1AMTvjaxtXbfnY4g3m0oMREY4oy0ttasrRm0mqKKYy SQ/hhVE5Og1QaMIB3U6DROsQ6i8kCk2UedJNb7pFulD8TvWksx6wLileSIumqf4E p/h5RU2xP9aZkmbBkehjLWyfyAr+az2/RvWDSucdTQcF7pViaDh8cwF1G4m2hrZn cjoNWDiYMTkiCY0aP+4DkMw7+A0qvNkOoaOuL13HcBTOA4BbHuacPOslVfa9guI6 EeGHjmBicQeytTUHBcCyhoizIBY7fcbx78YX0oC8NMSd2AI7F3PlGyNrBzvVTrd5 DqfBIx9LykAhrLz6QQCJdymE+Tx7LbiK81/usPXTJ+IremdL0VrjLF865C02s4Vu eSBRXkYHYtBQDpzMDK3kumFW2nPP63w60lNOKT+NzV3h1dRzX90= =SPfh -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Repeating: Only the Automatic Approvals of BSP Reimbursements are on Hold; You scan still Ask
> "Lucas" == Lucas Nussbaum writes: Lucas> Hi Sam, Lucas> On 10/01/20 at 05:35 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: >> TL;DR: You are welcome to ask for approval for attending a BSP or >> similar; it's only the automatic approvals on hold. >> >> I heard two different people in an email thread claim that you cannot >> get reimbursed for attending a BSP. >> The only thing that is on hold right now is *automatic approvals*. >> Just ask first. Lucas> I'm curious, since I was the one that setup that BSP policy: Lucas> Did you trace back when we went from "I am willing to approve Lucas> reimbursement requests about attending BSPs" (which is basically what Lucas> was in [1]) to "automatic approvals"? No, I did not. I always thought Chris set up the BSP policy and never traced it back further than him.
Re: Repeating: Only the Automatic Approvals of BSP Reimbursements are on Hold; You scan still Ask
Hi Sam, On 10/01/20 at 05:35 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote: > TL;DR: You are welcome to ask for approval for attending a BSP or > similar; it's only the automatic approvals on hold. > > I heard two different people in an email thread claim that you cannot > get reimbursed for attending a BSP. > The only thing that is on hold right now is *automatic approvals*. > Just ask first. I'm curious, since I was the one that setup that BSP policy: Did you trace back when we went from "I am willing to approve reimbursement requests about attending BSPs" (which is basically what was in [1]) to "automatic approvals"? AFAIK, the only case where we had/have automatic approval was for DSA. - Lucas [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2014/11/msg00050.html
Re: Repeating: Only the Automatic Approvals of BSP Reimbursements are on Hold; You scan still Ask
> Asking for pre approval als means you don't book tickets and arrange travel > before knowing if you are going to be able to claim back > This to me is the best cause of action for any proposed expenditure Plus, in my experience, for me as a participant it is not too much of a hassle. In most cases, I literally got a pre-approval within minutes (don't abuse this quote to demand such a quick reaction from Sam or any future DPL!) -nik
Re: Repeating: Only the Automatic Approvals of BSP Reimbursements are on Hold; You scan still Ask
Asking for pre approval als means you don't book tickets and arrange travel before knowing if you are going to be able to claim back This to me is the best cause of action for any proposed expenditure On 10 January 2020 10:35:23 GMT, Sam Hartman wrote: >TL;DR: You are welcome to ask for approval for attending a BSP or >similar; it's only the automatic approvals on hold. > >I heard two different people in an email thread claim that you cannot >get reimbursed for attending a BSP. >The only thing that is on hold right now is *automatic approvals*. >Just ask first. > >At one level that might create more work. >If it does, it will push getting a real policy up the priority queue. > > >At another level, my frustration mostly surrounded documentation of >expenses and being in a position where people asking for approval and I >had different ideas about which contributors should be approved. >Asking for pre-approval reduces the emotional cost to me significantly. > >--Sam -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Repeating: Only the Automatic Approvals of BSP Reimbursements are on Hold; You scan still Ask
TL;DR: You are welcome to ask for approval for attending a BSP or similar; it's only the automatic approvals on hold. I heard two different people in an email thread claim that you cannot get reimbursed for attending a BSP. The only thing that is on hold right now is *automatic approvals*. Just ask first. At one level that might create more work. If it does, it will push getting a real policy up the priority queue. At another level, my frustration mostly surrounded documentation of expenses and being in a position where people asking for approval and I had different ideas about which contributors should be approved. Asking for pre-approval reduces the emotional cost to me significantly. --Sam
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On 19-10-07 18 h 13, Sam Hartman wrote: >> "Louis-Philippe" == Louis-Philippe Véronneau writes: > Louis-Philippe> I've taken part in organising sprints, miniconfs, > Louis-Philippe> DebConfs and BSPs before and although I salute the > Louis-Philippe> effort to make the BSP reimbursement process easier > Louis-Philippe> for everyone, I think we should instead work on a > Louis-Philippe> common set of solutions for all Debian-related > Louis-Philippe> reimbursements. > > This sounds like a great project, but it's well beyond the scope of > anything I'm interested in working on during my term. > > Someone else could drive the effort but I won't have energy beyond > following the discussion and giving a couple of comments. > > Do you want to block the current BSP question on a broader solution? That's not my intention no. If we decide not to work on these issues, then IMHO the 'slightly better documented version of the previous process' mentioned by tbm and tiago and you is a better option than asking organisers to take care of this. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org ⠈⠳⣄ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: BSP Reimbursements
> "Louis-Philippe" == Louis-Philippe Véronneau writes: Louis-Philippe> I've taken part in organising sprints, miniconfs, Louis-Philippe> DebConfs and BSPs before and although I salute the Louis-Philippe> effort to make the BSP reimbursement process easier Louis-Philippe> for everyone, I think we should instead work on a Louis-Philippe> common set of solutions for all Debian-related Louis-Philippe> reimbursements. This sounds like a great project, but it's well beyond the scope of anything I'm interested in working on during my term. Someone else could drive the effort but I won't have energy beyond following the discussion and giving a couple of comments. Do you want to block the current BSP question on a broader solution? --Sam
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On 19-10-02 10 h 43, Sam Hartman wrote: > > TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of > batching together travel reimbursement requests. > > HI. A while back, I suspended the automatic approval of reimbursements > for attending BSPs. You can still ask for approval for attending a > BSP, you can't just send me a reimbursement request with no approval. > > We had a bit of discussion about how things ought to/might work here. > Holger proposed that it would make more sense for the people running > BSPs to batch approvals kind of like we do for sprints and > mini-DebConfs. > > If we want to do things that way, no action is required on my part. I > am very willing to approve such budgets, and even to amend such budgets > if it looks like more people are coming. But I do actually want to see > them ahead of time, just so I know what's going on. > > So, if we're generally happy with BSP organizers putting together a > travel budget and handling who will get reimbursed, then I think the > next step is to write up how to do that on the wiki. > I'd appreciate it if someone would volunteer to do that. > If you get text together, please drop treasu...@debian.org a note asking > for review (that also reaches me). > > Asking BSP organizers to help with this is great from the DPL side. > The only concern is if it pushes the effort involved in organizing a > BSP up too much so people don't want to do it. > > If that ends up being the case I'm happy with some sort of automatic > approval process for DDs attending BSPs (and easy approval for other > contributors when that makes sense). > But let's figure out if we want BSP organizers to handle this first. I've taken part in organising sprints, miniconfs, DebConfs and BSPs before and although I salute the effort to make the BSP reimbursement process easier for everyone, I think we should instead work on a common set of solutions for all Debian-related reimbursements. I don't really see why we should have 4 different processes for BSPs, miniconfs, sprints and DebConfs. Here are a few problems I've met before: 1. Dealing with multiple TOs When dealing with multiple TOs, the main problem I see is the lack of clear communication between TOs, the DPL and the organisers. 1.1 How is Debian France to know if person X has been reimbursed by SPI for the same approved expenses? 1.2 When the DPL approves a group budget and people ask to be reimbursed by different TOs, how should we handle individual requests? Should the "plus or minus 10%" be applied to individual requests or to the group budget? I think the reimbursement process should make clear who is to be reimbursed by whom and the DPL-signed email that approves expenses should also specify this information. 2. Lack of clear deadlines It's a PITA for organisers and TOs when people take a very long time to send their reimbursement requests. We should establish clear deadlines for the reimbursement process (3 months max after the event?). Life happens and there can be individual exceptions, but having clear deadlines creates good incentives. 3. Lack of agreement on what is reimbursed As pointed by others in this thread, we don't have clear guideline on: * visa costs * food during travel * food during the event * accommodation At the moment, it highly depends on the DPL in place and what people ask for. 4. Different tools used to keep track of shit All the TOs use different systems to keep track of reimbursement requests. To a certain level, that's fine, but it complicates everyone's life. What I would like to see deployed is a tool similar to nm.debian.org (a clear frontend for a process that is mainly email-based) that would track the different steps of a reimbursement request. One could see what the steps for a particular reimbursement request are (different TOs ask for different documents) and easily check the status of the request. Most of all, TOs could see who's supposed to reimburse who, what has been reimbursed by other TOs when, etc. -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Louis-Philippe Véronneau ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋ po...@debian.org / veronneau.org ⠈⠳⣄ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On 2019-10-07 at 08:00:59 +, Holger Levsen wrote: > On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 09:26:07AM +0200, Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi wrote: > > I'd think that the main difference from a regular sprint is that on a > > Camp there isn't a predefined theme, people come and decide what they > > want to work on (sometimes in microsprints of 2-3 people). > sounds like DebCamp to me, though you might want to call it a party > instead, eg a BSP ;) that's the idea, except for scale: it's 4 days instead of a week (and for most people that includes traveling), it's not attached to another event (so one needs to travel specifically for it), and thus significantly fewer people are expected to attend. That's why there is a Camp in the name :) -- Elena ``of Valhalla''
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On Mon, Oct 07, 2019 at 09:26:07AM +0200, Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi wrote: > I'd think that the main difference from a regular sprint is that on a > Camp there isn't a predefined theme, people come and decide what they > want to work on (sometimes in microsprints of 2-3 people). sounds like DebCamp to me, though you might want to call it a party instead, eg a BSP ;) -- cheers, Holger --- holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On 2019-10-07 at 10:30:05 +0800, Paul Wise wrote: > While I never attended them due to not being in Europe, the Sun/Snow > Camp events seemed similar to Sprints/BSPs; events where folks work on > Debian/FLOSS related things together. I think we need more of these > sorts of events. I'd think that the main difference from a regular sprint is that on a Camp there isn't a predefined theme, people come and decide what they want to work on (sometimes in microsprints of 2-3 people). -- Elena ``of Valhalla'' signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 4:52 PM Elena ``of Valhalla'' Grandi wrote: > I'm also not sure that this kind of event is still considered a good > idea from a Debian-wide perspective, so maybe they wouldn't qualify > anymore anyway, and this is all moot. While I never attended them due to not being in Europe, the Sun/Snow Camp events seemed similar to Sprints/BSPs; events where folks work on Debian/FLOSS related things together. I think we need more of these sorts of events. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
Re: BSP Reimbursements
TL; DR: The previous process was not entirely automatic as Martin implied. I'm fine with a slightly better documented version if the previous process if that's what we want. > "Martin" == Martin Michlmayr writes: Martin> All this talk about who should handle approvals (DPL or Martin> organizers) and putting together a budget seems way overkill Martin> to me. We're talking about $100 per person. The whole idea Martin> was to make this a painless process. i.e. just send a Martin> request to a TO and they will process it. No involvement of Martin> the DPL or organizer needed. That's not how it worked before. There was no pre-approval required, but the DPL still had to approve things for the TOS. What I saw happen reading through the leader archives is that people would tend to send in a request to Chris including receipts that he would approve; hopefully the TO was copied to process once he had approved. If the TOs are willing to take on the work load, I'd be fine with that. However, my understanding is that at least for Debian France, Debian expendatures do require explicit DPL approval by their bylaws. That's from a discussion during the campaign period this year on debian-vote. The process isn't entirely decision free. The $100 wasn't made available to anyone in the world, but some vaguely worded version of sufficiently active Debian contributors. so someone needs to see if the person is a sufficiently active contributor (and I'd prefer more clarity around what that means). Also, for SPI, you need to make sure the expenses are reasonable and customary (they are expenses SPI can reimburse as a non-profit). Other TOs will have similar tax rules. now, I guess the TOs are used to making that determination and we could let them do so. If we document the process and document who is eligible, I'm fine sending out quick approvals without any pre-approval. I ask that for anything lacking pre-approval the eligibility involve basically no judgment calls and be entirely mechanical. For example we could say DDs and DMs area always approved and other contributors should ask. Ore something more liberal. I never want to get boxed into the position of having to approve someone because they have already spent the money when I don't think that is a good call. Either they are approved because they meet a mechanical criteria or I get asked at a point where it is reasonable to say no.
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On 2019-10-05 5:12 a.m., Martin Michlmayr wrote: [...] My only concern with the automatic $100 is the workload it may cause for TOs, but this might not be a huge problem since a) many people won't bother submitting a claim since it's not worth their time (automatically selecting those who really need/want it) and b) so far there haven't been that many requests. (Although you can argue the latter is because it wasn't documented/publicised properly.) Of course, it's different if we're talking about bigger amounts, but for that we have a sprint/mini-debconf process anyway. Let's just have an automatic $100 and keep the bureaucracy to a minimum. +1, please. -- tiago
Re: BSP Reimbursements
* Sam Hartman [2019-10-02 10:43]: > If that ends up being the case I'm happy with some sort of automatic > approval process for DDs attending BSPs (and easy approval for other > contributors when that makes sense). I might be wrong here but my understanding of the $100 for attending BSPs that existed in the past is that it was automatic. All this talk about who should handle approvals (DPL or organizers) and putting together a budget seems way overkill to me. We're talking about $100 per person. The whole idea was to make this a painless process. i.e. just send a request to a TO and they will process it. No involvement of the DPL or organizer needed. I recently read something about corporate life where someone said you need X approvals to spend $1000 but nobody asks if you invite 15 people to a one hour meeting which will easily cost $1000. It sounds like we're making the same mistake here. For $100, do we really need a long approval process? My only concern with the automatic $100 is the workload it may cause for TOs, but this might not be a huge problem since a) many people won't bother submitting a claim since it's not worth their time (automatically selecting those who really need/want it) and b) so far there haven't been that many requests. (Although you can argue the latter is because it wasn't documented/publicised properly.) Of course, it's different if we're talking about bigger amounts, but for that we have a sprint/mini-debconf process anyway. Let's just have an automatic $100 and keep the bureaucracy to a minimum. (Not speaking for the treasurer team, for SPI or anyone else.) -- Martin Michlmayr https://www.cyrius.com/
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On 2019-10-02 at 10:43:37 -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > > TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of > batching together travel reimbursement requests. > [...] > Asking BSP organizers to help with this is great from the DPL side. > The only concern is if it pushes the effort involved in organizing a > BSP up too much so people don't want to do it. I've organized a low-effort event (Snow Camp) that has been considered similar to a BSP for travel refund reasons. The idea behind that kind of event is to keep organization tasks to a minimum: e.g. registration is mostly delegated to the hostel / hotel the event happens in, so that it is feasible to have a tiny organizing team of one-two people. If I had to also take care of travel reimbursement requests I wouldn't do it: it's something that I would need to learn anew every year, and then my brain would consider it a high stressful task with hints of judging people, and that's not something I'm ready to volunteer to. On the other hand, afaik the Sun Camp didn't have these reimbursements, and for the first Snow Camp they were only available / announced late, when most people had already registered, so I think that the event can happen anyway even without them. I'm also not sure that this kind of event is still considered a good idea from a Debian-wide perspective, so maybe they wouldn't qualify anymore anyway, and this is all moot. -- Elena ``of Valhalla''
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 10:43:37AM -0400, Sam Hartman wrote: > > TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of > batching together travel reimbursement requests. > > HI. A while back, I suspended the automatic approval of reimbursements > for attending BSPs. You can still ask for approval for attending a > BSP, you can't just send me a reimbursement request with no approval. > > We had a bit of discussion about how things ought to/might work here. > Holger proposed that it would make more sense for the people running > BSPs to batch approvals kind of like we do for sprints and > mini-DebConfs. > > If we want to do things that way, no action is required on my part. I > am very willing to approve such budgets, and even to amend such budgets > if it looks like more people are coming. But I do actually want to see > them ahead of time, just so I know what's going on. > > So, if we're generally happy with BSP organizers putting together a > travel budget and handling who will get reimbursed, then I think the > next step is to write up how to do that on the wiki. > I'd appreciate it if someone would volunteer to do that. > If you get text together, please drop treasu...@debian.org a note asking > for review (that also reaches me). > > Asking BSP organizers to help with this is great from the DPL side. > The only concern is if it pushes the effort involved in organizing a > BSP up too much so people don't want to do it. > > If that ends up being the case I'm happy with some sort of automatic > approval process for DDs attending BSPs (and easy approval for other > contributors when that makes sense). > But let's figure out if we want BSP organizers to handle this first. FWIW, I would assume a procedure for BSPs would look very similar to the existing procedure for sprints, which is already documented somewhere. I think having a single procedure for "meetings" would be a win. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: BSP Reimbursements
Le jeudi, 3 octobre 2019, 12.54:53 h CEST Kyle Robbertze a écrit : > On 2019/10/02 22:17, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > > Third: what rules-of-thumb, or guidelines do we want for travel support? > > In the context of relatively _short_ events (2-5 days), I think we ought > > to > > put upper limits in term of amounts, and in terms of distance. Put > > differently: set economical and ecological limits. In this day and age, I > > don't think Debian should be supporting flying long distances for short > > events [2]. So we could have a duration-to-distance, or similar, > > criteria, as well as "qualitative" incentives. I'd prefer Debian to > > sponsor a 600€ train ride than a 150€ flight, for instance. As a rule of > > thumb, what about: "Travel distance is max ~400km per event day duration, > > prefer land transportation where applicable"? > > (Also, connected to that "distance" question is also "who gets > > supported?") > > A distance limit effectively prevents people from remoter areas of the > world from attending events unless they organise them themselves or have > the means to afford internation travel. Note that my intention was to have a linear relation between duration and distance; and my 400km factor was perhaps a bad choice. But sticking to that factor for the merits of example, it would mean: * 1 day event: max 400km away * 2 days event: max 800km away * 3 days event: max 1200km away * … etc … you get the idea. The point of that idea is to encourage longer events and, inversely, to discourage long travels for short events. But I understand that it doesn't meet enthusiasm nor consensus; and I do realize that my own privileged center-european situation makes it clearly easier for me than for some others. I also arguably picked a prohibitively low number. > While I would not expect Debian to sponsor my travel entirely to attend > a 3 day conference in Europe, often partial funding makes attending > these events possible for me (when the duration and content makes it > worth the travel). Partial funding should often be possible, and encouraged, yes. But then we hit the "who have no other means to cover the costs" phrasing: if someone _can_ spend 800$ to fly, do they really "have no other means to cover" for 1000$, or 1200$ ? (I have in the past been part of the Bursaries team for DebConf. These problems are hard™.) > The trade-off between potential value and distance/means of transport is > inherently personal and shouldn't be decided by Debian for everyone. Well. We're discussing what Debian would financially support, not what Debian would allow. Even with this idea implemented (and it doesn't look like it will), one could fly for as long as they wanted to attend the shortest Debian event, provided that they would either cover for their travel costs (or only ask for support from Debian for the maximal amount granted under the circumstances). Thank you for bringing a different viewpoint. Cheers, OdyX signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 12:54:53PM +0200, Kyle Robbertze wrote: > A distance limit effectively prevents people from remoter areas of the > world. +1 (This basically means almost anyone not living in Europe.) -- cheers, Holger --- holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org PGP fingerprint: B8BF 5413 7B09 D35C F026 FE9D 091A B856 069A AA1C signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: BSP Reimbursements
Hi OdyX, On 2019/10/02 22:17, Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > Hello Sam, > > (I'm hereby answering out of my experience of helping organizing the > miniDebConf Vaumarcus this year, but without coordination with the rest of > the > team). > > Le mercredi, 2 octobre 2019, 16.43:37 h CEST Sam Hartman a écrit : >> TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of >> batching together travel reimbursement requests. > > [...] > > Third: what rules-of-thumb, or guidelines do we want for travel support? > In the context of relatively _short_ events (2-5 days), I think we ought to > put upper limits in term of amounts, and in terms of distance. Put > differently: set economical and ecological limits. In this day and age, I > don't think Debian should be supporting flying long distances for short > events > [2]. So we could have a duration-to-distance, or similar, criteria, as well > as > "qualitative" incentives. I'd prefer Debian to sponsor a 600€ train ride than > a 150€ flight, for instance. As a rule of thumb, what about: "Travel distance > is max ~400km per event day duration, prefer land transportation where > applicable"? > (Also, connected to that "distance" question is also "who gets supported?") A distance limit effectively prevents people from remoter areas of the world from attending events unless they organise them themselves or have the means to afford internation travel. This internation travel can be very expensive. For example, I live in South Africa, making any international travel be over 1000kms (just to the neighbouring country). While I would not expect Debian to sponsor my travel entirely to attend a 3 day conference in Europe, often partial funding makes attending these events possible for me (when the duration and content makes it worth the travel). The trade-off between potential value and distance/means of transport is inherently personal and shouldn't be decided by Debian for everyone. If someone feels strongly about the mode and distance they travel, then that is their prerogative. Cheers Kyle -- ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Kyle Robbertze ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ Debian Developer ⠈⠳⣄ https://wiki.debian.org/KyleRobbertze
Re: BSP Reimbursements
On Wed, Oct 2, 2019, 13:17 Didier 'OdyX' Raboud wrote: > So what I'd would enjoy to see is exchanges along the lines of: > > - BSP Orga: hey DPL; we organize a 3-days/2-nights BSP and would like to > support travel for potential attendees. We expect about 12 travel > requests; > what can you do for us? > - DPL (or treasurer): the guidelines say that Debian will support travel > for > attendees coming from less than ~ 1000km and for max 400€ per individual. > We > grant you an initial 12 persons envelope for travel support. Would you be > willing to make an exception (larger distance or larger price), please > consult > with $team first. Should you need to support more attendees, please come > back > to us. Reimbursements will be processed after the event, provided > justifications and your approval by this $TO. > What about people who are outside of the max distance but are willing to fund some of the travel costs themselves (or some other method than Debian funding)? Jacob Lifshay >
Re: BSP Reimbursements
Hello Sam,
(I'm hereby answering out of my experience of helping organizing the
miniDebConf Vaumarcus this year, but without coordination with the rest of the
team).
Le mercredi, 2 octobre 2019, 16.43:37 h CEST Sam Hartman a écrit :
> TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of
> batching together travel reimbursement requests.
Yes, but… I think we, as a project, need to be clear about what this means,
along at least three axes.
First: what types of events qualify for travel reimbursement?
You have mentioned BSPs, but would a miniDebConf also qualify? Of course, it
is the expectation that miniDebConf attendees attend to "enhance Debian"; but
also that they might present, or attend talks, presentations, etc; during
which they are not (should not be) hunting bugs. I think such micro-
conferences, although not explicitly Bug Squashing Parties, should also
benefit.
(Shameless plug; the miniDebConf Vaumarcus still welcomes attendees and
proposals! [0,1])
Second: from which account is the money taken?
The answer might seem obvious, but let's make sure we're on the same line of
thought. When organizing a BSP (or a miniDebConf), it is of good measure to
try find sponsors and supporters to help lower the cost for attendees. In
plenty of cases, for a multi-day event, one needs a venue, help cover food and
accomodation costs, etc. But these events rarely last for more than a couple
of days; so adding significant charges to support travel makes the funding a
larger challenge. So the only realistic money source seems to be external;
hence "Debian" money, not "event" money.
(The annual DebConf is different in terms of scale and duration, which reduces
travel support in proportion to the other charges of the budget.)
Third: what rules-of-thumb, or guidelines do we want for travel support?
In the context of relatively _short_ events (2-5 days), I think we ought to
put upper limits in term of amounts, and in terms of distance. Put
differently: set economical and ecological limits. In this day and age, I
don't think Debian should be supporting flying long distances for short events
[2]. So we could have a duration-to-distance, or similar, criteria, as well as
"qualitative" incentives. I'd prefer Debian to sponsor a 600€ train ride than
a 150€ flight, for instance. As a rule of thumb, what about: "Travel distance
is max ~400km per event day duration, prefer land transportation where
applicable"?
(Also, connected to that "distance" question is also "who gets supported?")
So… To wrap this up. As potential organizer; I'd be all for granting travel
support to attendees ourselves provided that:
- Debian money is available;
- common guidelines for the allowance of Debian money for travel support for
attendees are public.
Without common rules-of-thumb, you, as DPL, would be de-facto delegating the
setting of travel support policies to events; with potentially large
differences in how we address the requests, and I'd regret this.
So what I'd would enjoy to see is exchanges along the lines of:
- BSP Orga: hey DPL; we organize a 3-days/2-nights BSP and would like to
support travel for potential attendees. We expect about 12 travel requests;
what can you do for us?
- DPL (or treasurer): the guidelines say that Debian will support travel for
attendees coming from less than ~ 1000km and for max 400€ per individual. We
grant you an initial 12 persons envelope for travel support. Would you be
willing to make an exception (larger distance or larger price), please consult
with $team first. Should you need to support more attendees, please come back
to us. Reimbursements will be processed after the event, provided
justifications and your approval by this $TO.
With my best regards,
OdyX
[0] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEvents/ch/2019/Vaumarcus
[1] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianEvents/ch/2019/Vaumarcus/TalkSubmissions
[2] Disclaimer: I have flown back and forth from Europe to various DebConfs in
the past; sometimes partially or fully thanks to Deb{Conf,ian} money.
I am not proud of this, and am searching for ways to attend that have a
lower carbon impact: stay longer; combine with other events; skip too far
DebConfs; etc.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
BSP Reimbursements
TL;DR: Do we want BSP organizers to take on the responsibility of batching together travel reimbursement requests. HI. A while back, I suspended the automatic approval of reimbursements for attending BSPs. You can still ask for approval for attending a BSP, you can't just send me a reimbursement request with no approval. We had a bit of discussion about how things ought to/might work here. Holger proposed that it would make more sense for the people running BSPs to batch approvals kind of like we do for sprints and mini-DebConfs. If we want to do things that way, no action is required on my part. I am very willing to approve such budgets, and even to amend such budgets if it looks like more people are coming. But I do actually want to see them ahead of time, just so I know what's going on. So, if we're generally happy with BSP organizers putting together a travel budget and handling who will get reimbursed, then I think the next step is to write up how to do that on the wiki. I'd appreciate it if someone would volunteer to do that. If you get text together, please drop treasu...@debian.org a note asking for review (that also reaches me). Asking BSP organizers to help with this is great from the DPL side. The only concern is if it pushes the effort involved in organizing a BSP up too much so people don't want to do it. If that ends up being the case I'm happy with some sort of automatic approval process for DDs attending BSPs (and easy approval for other contributors when that makes sense). But let's figure out if we want BSP organizers to handle this first. --Sam
