Re: Minutes 2016-02-24

On 25 February 2016 at 13:07, Benjamin Berg <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Do, 2016-02-25 at 12:47 +0100, Tobias Mueller wrote:
>> Hi.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:18:53AM +0100, Benjamin Berg wrote:
>> >
>> >   * AGREED: regcfp will be our software for registration and CfP unless
>> > this should be revisited for good reasons next week
>> As for the CfP system:
>> Do we know from the VoCCC how much a frab would make their and our lives
>> easier?  Or do they expect it even?
>>
>> From what I can see from all the other CCC events the integration of the
>> list of talks with the video page is reasonably good. So you can see the
>> video from the talk in the schedule and vice versa.
>
> This simply requires an XML export of the schedule in the defined
> format.
>
> https://c3voc.de/schedulexml
> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/voc/schedule/master/validator/xsd/schedule.xml.xsd
>
> Looks pretty straight forward. Basically defines the conference, each
> day, then the rooms and in there each talk.
>
>> I've seen it working for events ranging from a handful of talks (FifFkon),
>> to a few dozen (mrmcd), up to a few hundred (FOSDEM, CCCongress).
>> My feeling is that frab is pretty much the standard nowadays.
>> The main feature I see is that it exports static HTML which is good
>> for security and archival purposes.
>> That alone makes me suggest to use Frab in the future for collecting
>> submissions and managing the schedule.
>
> The advantages of regcfp:
>  * Seems to work well for us (i.e. paper team, registration/badges)
>  * People already know the system
>  * We have the author supporting it for us
>
> I don't want to block a move to something else. However, I don't really
> see schedule archives as a big enough reason to move considering we
> would need someone to:
>  * figure everything out (badges, cfp, schedule, registration, payment)
>  * evaluate which solution is really better
>  * set it up on our servers
>  * be dedicated to maintain it in the runup to the conference
>    (and that should really be a non-core team person)

From the papers committee point of view, the system needs to:
* allow voting and do light processing on the results
* allow a non-voter to see results and who or how many people have
voted per paper, but not the votes
* send automated mail to accepted/rejected papers
* support having more than one speaker

> And that has to happen before we open the CfP …
>
> Benjamin
> _______________________________________________
> guadec-organization mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/guadec-organization
>
_______________________________________________
guadec-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/guadec-list