On Thu, Dec 27, 2018, 10:42 Henri Verbeet <hverbeet@gmail.com wrote:
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.
While I don't have strong opinions on where we host it this year (or most years), I'd be in favor of the committee being involved more involved than deciding stipends. Especially since the location chosen has a large effect on how the stipends will look.