> Agreed. You should also look at http://live.gnome.org/GuadecPlanning > which is our collected know-how from organising GUADECs. > > http://live.gnome.org/GuadecPlanning/CheckList is a bunch of questions > which need to be answered before we know we're finished. There is not an > order or size or priority associated with the tasks, though. I will try to go through this interesting documentation as long as we go through the organisation of the current GUADEC. >> Proposing 3 tracks: >> >> - Meeting the users >> >> - Approaching GNOME 3.0 >> >> - Collecting toughest bones > > > <snip> Perhaps it needs another formulation to make it clear what we're > looking for, but these sound great. Good! I have a doubt. It's time to make decisions but it's not clear who and how decide now. Formerly it was Tim and the board (and before this I guess the GUADEC6 comittee). Now Tim has left the Foundation, the board is in election period and the GUADEC7 comittee is not a real thing yet. So for instance, about these three tracks. What needs to happen in order to decide that they will structure the papers of the next GUADEC? > Selecting topics without presenters won't work. Definitely, agreed. > Great. Sounds good. Keynotes usually decide themselves what they are > going to present, though. Good to know. Makes sense and it's a usual practice. -- Quim Gil http://interactors.coop | http://desdeamericaconamor.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature