On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 at 04:19, Jeremy White jwhite@codeweavers.com wrote:
On 12/17/18 5:47 PM, Henri Verbeet wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2018 at 01:34, Jeremy White jwhite@codeweavers.com wrote:
We punted on the question of where to have the next Wineconf. Two candidates we considered were Japan and Toronto.
I've asked folks at Valve if they would be willing to present at the next conference, and the answer was positive for Toronto, and less enthusiastic for Japan. Ulrich has been patiently offering to host for many years, and I think it would be good to rotate back to North America on it's scheduled year.
Just so there's no misunderstanding, "we" above is "the Wine Project Leadership committee", as opposed to "CodeWeavers", right?
It was not intended to be a 'We' as in CodeWeavers, but I meant it more as a 'We the gathered Wine community'.
We've never really had a formal process for deciding things like next conference location; it tends to be more of an ad hoc consensus. And while the committee holds the power to fund the event, it does not generally take a role in determining it's location. That is, it does not act like a board of directors would and make decisions like this. The committee really limits itself to funding decisions.
Since it's been a while since we've had a "Governance" discussion, I would be curious to learn the opinions of the other people on this list if I were to suggest that perhaps it would be healthy for Wine if the committee did play a more active role in decisions like these. Building a consensus is of course great, but that's not the same as making a decision—decisions are ultimately made by individuals. I also think it would be fair towards potential hosts if the WineConf process was fairly transparent.
I would like it to be clear that this reply is as a member of the Wine project, as opposed to a CodeWeavers contractor. At the same time, since apparently Valve's willingness to attend in Canada, but not in Japan was a consideration, I think it's only fair to point out that CodeWeavers also has significant customers in Japan. Were they asked as well?
No. But I think Valve's use of Wine is a particularly interesting story.
Certainly. Much of which would be under NDA though?
The other point is that I felt I got a similar reaction from a number of people when we did discuss Asia; that they would come to North America, but not Asia. My feeling is that there is a small group of people that are very passionate for the idea, and then a lot of indifferent people, and a small number that would not come if it was in Asia. Anyone saying they will not come to the conference tends to affect me, perhaps in a disproportionate way.
Was that at WineConf, by any chance? I think it's fair to point out that that would exclude asking people that would not attend in Europe or the US. And of course, I think it would be somewhat optimistic to expect the same kind of attendance as in e.g. Europe; much of the point would trying to make that grow over the next few years.
Pitchforks and torches go here.
Although I'm confident Ulrich would make a great host, I don't think anyone would be terribly surprised to learn I'd be a little disappointed if WineConf 2019 wouldn't be in Asia.
Just to speak to my thinking a bit further. My feeling was that if we telegraphed the move to Asia for a longer period that we would increase the odds of having more people attend. I would also like to have an actual host - someone that lives in Asia who is willing to volunteer - so that we have someone who can coordinate the event. My hope was that we could start that ask now, and have them stand up and advocate for their site at this years conference.
But the point of the email was to provoke a conversation, so thank you for that.
Well, I try :D I do get the impression though that most people either really don't care, or don't feel like their opinion would make a difference, so at the very least I'll give you that.
Henri