Did you get enough responses? Seems like a mention on wine-devel might be in order. On 4/30/07, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
Hi Folks,
Well, I was hoping that out of the chatter following my last email, we'd have consenus about the location.
However, the overwhelming silence didn't really help :-/. So, to try to help get some forward momentum, I thought we should turn to a survey again - then we'd just pick the most popular spot.
To that end, if you could visit this page:
http://www.winehq.org/site/wineconf/survey
and enter your preference, I'd appreciate it. Should take only a sec (exactly 1 question, although your name and email are nice too :-/).
Cheers,
Jeremy
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
-- Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv
We've got 24 so far; 12 for Zurich, 9 for Amsterdam, and 3 for Bratislava. I'm attaching the raw results, as there are comments in there. The summary of the comments is that either Amsterdam or Zurich works equally well for most folks; some people only like the LA option, and Marcus is concerned that the LA option won't really work out. Is that enough? Cheers, Jeremy Dan Kegel wrote:
Did you get enough responses? Seems like a mention on wine-devel might be in order.
On 4/30/07, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)codeweavers.com> wrote:
Hi Folks,
Well, I was hoping that out of the chatter following my last email, we'd have consenus about the location.
However, the overwhelming silence didn't really help :-/. So, to try to help get some forward momentum, I thought we should turn to a survey again - then we'd just pick the most popular spot.
To that end, if you could visit this page:
http://www.winehq.org/site/wineconf/survey
and enter your preference, I'd appreciate it. Should take only a sec (exactly 1 question, although your name and email are nice too :-/).
Cheers,
Jeremy
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
Amsterdam Jeremy Newman jnewman(a)codeweavers.com Sweet! Zurich Jeremy White jwhite(a)codeweavers.com Let's hang with Google... Zurich Kai Blin kai.blin(a)gmail.com Do we have a date for this yet? September is kind of busy for me. I'm on vacation for two weeks and on a Samba conference after that. :/ Amsterdam Roderick Colenbrander thunderbird2k(a)gmx.net I'm from the Netherlands as well. I'm studying at the University of Twente. At the campus of my university we have good facilities (both for the conference as well as sleeping). This might be an option. Roderick Bratislava Robert Shearman rob(a)codeweavers.com I'm excited for Martin to show us his local bar. Zurich is also an attractive option. Amsterdam Huw Davies huw(a)codeweavers.com Zurich Jonathan Ernst jonathan(a)ernstfamily.ch Zurich Brian Vincent bvincent(a)moonlightbasin.com My plans to attend will be completely contingent on dates since my fiance is probably not going to want to go to Wineconf for a honeymoon. I voted Zurich ONLY because there's a possibility of a satellite site. Otherwise I would have voted for Amsterdam. Zurich Steven Edwards steven(a)codeweavers.com My choice order is 1,3,2 Zurich Eric Pouech eric.pouech(a)wanadoo.fr Either Zurich or Amsterdam or Utrecht are fine to me (I checked Netherlands because travel is slighty shorter). Zurich James Hawkins truiken(a)gmail.com Attending the satellite in Santa Monica will be my only way to be a part of WineConf this year. Zurich Hans Leidekker hans(a)it.vu.nl I'll be modest and limit my choice to Zurich and Bratislava ;) Amsterdam Michael Stefaniuc mstefani(a)redhat.com I don't mind Zurich either. Bratislava Andrew Bogott andrewbogott(a)yahoo.com (Really, all three places sound great. Just, I've never been to Bratislava.) Zurich Francois Gouget fgouget(a)codeweavers.com Zurich _Marcus_ marcus(a)jet.franken.de perhaps no satellite ... it is not going to work I guess Amsterdam Stefan Dösinger stefandoesinger(a)gmx.at I'd be fine with the other places too. Amsterdam Henri Verbeet hverbeet(a)gmail.com Any location in the Netherlands is obviously very convenient for me, but I don't particularly mind either of the other two options either. Zurich Scott Ritchie scott(a)open-vote.org If someone can get to Amsterdam or Utrech, they likely can get to Zurich. The main selling point is the satellite site in California, though. Zurich Ulrich Czekalla ulrich(a)codeweavers.com Amsterdam Paul Millar paul(a)astro.gla.ac.uk I went for Amsterdam/Netherlands just because I know a few people who live in Amsterdam: I'd be happy with any of the three. Amsterdam Tom Wickline twickline(a)gmail.com I would like for it to be held in October, six months out.. but any date at least four months out is fine with me.. Just ample time to plan and save for the trip. Cheers, Tom Amsterdam Martin Pilka mpilka(a)codeweavers.com I vote for Amsterdam, since I have been never there :) Anyway, I would go to any of those 3 places Zurich Dan Kegel dank(a)kegel.com
On 5/1/07, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)winehq.org> wrote:
We've got 24 so far; 12 for Zurich, 9 for Amsterdam, and 3 for Bratislava.
It seems like most of the people that voted for Amsterdam will take Zurich as a second choice so if we treat it like instant runoff that clears a majority. -- Steven Edwards "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 05:04:23PM -0400, Steven Edwards wrote:
On 5/1/07, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)winehq.org> wrote:
We've got 24 so far; 12 for Zurich, 9 for Amsterdam, and 3 for Bratislava.
It seems like most of the people that voted for Amsterdam will take Zurich as a second choice so if we treat it like instant runoff that clears a majority.
Same way round, I wouldn't mind Amsterdam either. ;) Ciao, Marcus
Jeremy White wrote:
We've got 24 so far; 12 for Zurich, 9 for Amsterdam, and 3 for Bratislava.
We have 12 more; 6 for Zurich, 4 for Amsterdam, and 2 for Bratislava. That makes the totals 18 Zurich, 13 Amsterdam, and 5 Bratislava. I think that is now statistically enough to declare for Zurich, although I'd like to hear from Mr. Hearn that he's ready to deal with that influx. Dan, I also think that a number of the folks voting, are doing so with the thought that they'd go to Santa Monica, so I want to make sure that works for you. We should probably also have a gut check on just how we would accommodate that. I fear that a 9 hour time zone difference is going to make things quite awkward. For example, a 9 am Saturday key note would be midnight Friday in LA. That tends to imply we'd really be having 2 events that are loosely coupled, rather than 1 functional event. I suppose staying up until 4 or 5 in the morning in LA is still easier on ones sleep patterns than flying to Europe, so perhaps there is some chance for overlap. I just don't want to be the one to ask Alexandre to wake up early to do his key note... <grin> Cheers, Jeremy
On 5/10/07, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Jeremy White wrote:
We've got 24 so far; 12 for Zurich, 9 for Amsterdam, and 3 for Bratislava.
We have 12 more; 6 for Zurich, 4 for Amsterdam, and 2 for Bratislava.
That makes the totals 18 Zurich, 13 Amsterdam, and 5 Bratislava.
I think that is now statistically enough to declare for Zurich, although I'd like to hear from Mr. Hearn that he's ready to deal with that influx.
Dan, I also think that a number of the folks voting, are doing so with the thought that they'd go to Santa Monica, so I want to make sure that works for you.
We should probably also have a gut check on just how we would accommodate that. I fear that a 9 hour time zone difference is going to make things quite awkward. For example, a 9 am Saturday key note would be midnight Friday in LA.
I don't mind a midnight meeting in LA :) -- James Hawkins
Jeremy White <jwhite(a)winehq.org> writes:
I suppose staying up until 4 or 5 in the morning in LA is still easier on ones sleep patterns than flying to Europe, so perhaps there is some chance for overlap. I just don't want to be the one to ask Alexandre to wake up early to do his key note... <grin>
You mean 9am isn't early???? ;-) I have to admit I'm fairly skeptical too about the synchronized remote site. If it's a two-way link it will be a major distraction IMO, and if it's one-way then the LA folks can just as well watch it on Saturday instead of staying up all night... -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org
OK, I now think the satellite isn't going to work out, for various reasons. I think we should go with Zurich, and look into travel scholarships for serious Wine developers who would come but for the expense of the flight.
Jeremy Newman is going to look into putting up ad words for a bit on the web site to see if that earns enough revenue to help offer travel scholarships; if that doesn't work, we'll see if we can figure something else out. Cheers, Jeremy Dan Kegel wrote:
OK, I now think the satellite isn't going to work out, for various reasons. I think we should go with Zurich, and look into travel scholarships for serious Wine developers who would come but for the expense of the flight.
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
Apologies for being a noob but was there a date decided for this? I can certainly (try to) entertain 18 people in Zurich, and we'll have enough space in the old office at least. About the video link, I don't think it'd be that distracting. It's pretty common to do 2-way videoconfs here and it works pretty well. Each side can turn their mic off easily if nobody is going to speak, though the noise suppression normally makes it unnecessary. But the timezone is the main issue. On 5/10/07, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Jeremy Newman is going to look into putting up ad words for a bit on the web site to see if that earns enough revenue to help offer travel scholarships; if that doesn't work, we'll see if we can figure something else out.
Cheers,
Jeremy
Dan Kegel wrote:
OK, I now think the satellite isn't going to work out, for various reasons. I think we should go with Zurich, and look into travel scholarships for serious Wine developers who would come but for the expense of the flight.
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
Ah..actually, it'd be more like 35-40, if past Wineconf attendance was any guide. (We had 50+ when we had the Samba guys too, but I'm not sure we'll repeat that). And I think you'd be the one setting the date; I think the preference is for a weekend in October (all else being equal on or before Oct 3, as we had one RSVPer who requested that). Cheers, Jeremy Mike Hearn wrote:
Apologies for being a noob but was there a date decided for this? I can certainly (try to) entertain 18 people in Zurich, and we'll have enough space in the old office at least.
About the video link, I don't think it'd be that distracting. It's pretty common to do 2-way videoconfs here and it works pretty well. Each side can turn their mic off easily if nobody is going to speak, though the noise suppression normally makes it unnecessary. But the timezone is the main issue.
On 5/10/07, Jeremy White <jwhite(a)winehq.org> wrote:
Jeremy Newman is going to look into putting up ad words for a bit on the web site to see if that earns enough revenue to help offer travel scholarships; if that doesn't work, we'll see if we can figure something else out.
Cheers,
Jeremy
Dan Kegel wrote:
OK, I now think the satellite isn't going to work out, for various reasons. I think we should go with Zurich, and look into travel scholarships for serious Wine developers who would come but for the expense of the flight.
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
_______________________________________________ wineconf mailing list wineconf(a)winehq.org http://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
Dan Kegel <dank06(a)kegel.com> wrote:
OK, I now think the satellite isn't going to work out, for various reasons. I think we should go with Zurich, and look into travel scholarships for serious Wine developers who would come but for the expense of the flight.
At this point it seems Zurich wins. Can we pick dates? I'd love it if we could video conference and I don't mind staying up all night. Zurich probably won't be an option for me, but LA might. Because of the time difference, would that work to our advantage getting conference space? I doubt too many people are using the conference room between 11pm and 8am. As long as bandwidth and connectivity weren't an issue, I think we might be able to get Cisco to come in and set up some of their products. I have some contacts there and they're heavily pushing their 'Telepresence' products. -Brian
On 5/11/07, Brian Vincent <vinn(a)theshell.com> wrote:
At this point it seems Zurich wins. Can we pick dates?
Mike Hearn is talking with the facilities people now to do that.
I'd love it if we could video conference and I don't mind staying up all night. Zurich probably won't be an option for me, but LA might. Because of the time difference, would that work to our advantage getting conference space? I doubt too many people are using the conference room between 11pm and 8am.
I don't think that's going to fly for various reasons (security being one), so it's probably Zurich without any linkup to the LA google office. But recording the event for YouTube and/or streaming audio and/or video are probably possibilities if somebody wants to take the lead. - Dan
participants (9)
-
Alexandre Julliard -
Brian Vincent -
Dan Kegel -
James Hawkins -
Jeremy White -
Marcus Meissner -
Mike Hearn -
Shachar Shemesh -
Steven Edwards