We touched on this during WineConf a little already, but were slightly short on time. With most people back from travel and the videos starting to get published, now seems like a good time to continue that conversation.
Key points from the previous conversation:
- We have several offers for hosting WineConf 2019. In no particular order: - Kiev, Ukraine, by Arthur Hil - Bali, Indonesia, by Aric Stewart - Vilnius, Lithuania, by Ričardas Barkauskas - Japan, by Alexandre Julliard - Toronto, Canada, by Ulrich Czekalla - Minnesota, United States of America, by Jeremy White - Austin, Texas, United States of America, by Austin English
Most of those are longer standing ones; Kiev, Bali and Japan are new this year. There's an argument for holding WineConf somewhere other than Europe and the United States after 16 years, although travel costs are also a consideration. Another fact worth pointing out in this context is that September 12, 2019 would be the 25th anniversary of Alexandre's maintainership of Wine.
- The time of year this time seems to have been generally well-received.
- Samathy proposed having a Code of Conduct for the conference. While, to my knowledge, there has never been an instance where one would have been needed, and hopefully that will continue to be the case in the future, it seems prudent to me to have one.
- The CFP could have been more formal/explicit.
- General discussion slots are still considered useful. We'd like to preserve those.
Other points I'd like to bring up:
- What did people think of the A/V recording? Was that a good thing, and something we should continue to keep improving? Or is the consensus that it's intrusive and not worth bothering with?
- I think there was a sentiment, at least with some people, that 2-3 days was fairly short and we weren't quite done discussing things yet. Would it perhaps make sense to extend the conference by a day in the future an include e.g. Monday as well?
- Should we put more effort into attracting external (e.g., from the broader Free Software community, and people/organisations using Wine) speakers?
We'd like to hear your feedback on these points, as well as your general feedback about which things you liked and would like to keep seeing in the future, and which things you disliked. If there's any feedback you'd rather not give in public, you can of course always simply send me a private e-mail as well.
Henri
I vote for Toronto but I like the other places suggested also.
My problem with the A/V was not being able to hear across the room.
The loudspeaker needed to be farther back. It was partially blocked by a pillar.
When I was doing my presentation I could barely hear anyone in the back. A microphone needs to be used by anyone asking questions. In some conferences there is a microphone handler who takes it to any attendee who is speaking.
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 9:59 AM, Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com wrote:
We touched on this during WineConf a little already, but were slightly short on time. With most people back from travel and the videos starting to get published, now seems like a good time to continue that conversation.
Key points from the previous conversation:
- We have several offers for hosting WineConf 2019. In no particular
order: - Kiev, Ukraine, by Arthur Hil - Bali, Indonesia, by Aric Stewart - Vilnius, Lithuania, by Ričardas Barkauskas - Japan, by Alexandre Julliard - Toronto, Canada, by Ulrich Czekalla - Minnesota, United States of America, by Jeremy White - Austin, Texas, United States of America, by Austin English
Most of those are longer standing ones; Kiev, Bali and Japan are new this year. There's an argument for holding WineConf somewhere other than Europe and the United States after 16 years, although travel costs are also a consideration. Another fact worth pointing out in this context is that September 12, 2019 would be the 25th anniversary of Alexandre's maintainership of Wine.
The time of year this time seems to have been generally well-received.
Samathy proposed having a Code of Conduct for the conference.
While, to my knowledge, there has never been an instance where one would have been needed, and hopefully that will continue to be the case in the future, it seems prudent to me to have one.
The CFP could have been more formal/explicit.
General discussion slots are still considered useful. We'd like to
preserve those.
Other points I'd like to bring up:
- What did people think of the A/V recording? Was that a good thing,
and something we should continue to keep improving? Or is the consensus that it's intrusive and not worth bothering with?
- I think there was a sentiment, at least with some people, that 2-3
days was fairly short and we weren't quite done discussing things yet. Would it perhaps make sense to extend the conference by a day in the future an include e.g. Monday as well?
- Should we put more effort into attracting external (e.g., from the
broader Free Software community, and people/organisations using Wine) speakers?
We'd like to hear your feedback on these points, as well as your general feedback about which things you liked and would like to keep seeing in the future, and which things you disliked. If there's any feedback you'd rather not give in public, you can of course always simply send me a private e-mail as well.
Henri
wineconf mailing list wineconf@winehq.org https://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
On 12 July 2018 at 08:00, Jeff Hanson jhansonxi@gmail.com wrote:
When I was doing my presentation I could barely hear anyone in the back. A microphone needs to be used by anyone asking questions. In some conferences there is a microphone handler who takes it to any attendee who is speaking.
Yeah, we did have microphones available for the audience, but didn't end up using them a lot. Assigning people to run around with them would probably help.
More broadly though, can I interpret your reaction as saying that you'd rather have more A/V equipment than less next time?
I think the A/V equipment was good but a camera facing the audience would have helped recording Q&A sessions.
On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 7:47 AM, Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com wrote:
On 12 July 2018 at 08:00, Jeff Hanson jhansonxi@gmail.com wrote:
When I was doing my presentation I could barely hear anyone in the
back. A
microphone needs to be used by anyone asking questions. In some
conferences
there is a microphone handler who takes it to any attendee who is
speaking.
Yeah, we did have microphones available for the audience, but didn't end up using them a lot. Assigning people to run around with them would probably help.
More broadly though, can I interpret your reaction as saying that you'd rather have more A/V equipment than less next time?
wineconf mailing list wineconf@winehq.org https://www.winehq.org/mailman/listinfo/wineconf
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 3:59 PM Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com wrote:
- We have several offers for hosting WineConf 2019. In no particular order:
- Kiev, Ukraine, by Arthur Hil
- Bali, Indonesia, by Aric Stewart
- Vilnius, Lithuania, by Ričardas Barkauskas
- Japan, by Alexandre Julliard
- Toronto, Canada, by Ulrich Czekalla
- Minnesota, United States of America, by Jeremy White
- Austin, Texas, United States of America, by Austin English
I like Toronto because I've never been there and it's on the same continent as me. Not having to jump over an ocean helps these trips to not be so expensive and makes it more likely that I can convince at least one Wine-using friend to come.
-Alex
Hi guys!
- What did people think of the A/V recording? Was that a good thing,
and something we should continue to keep improving? Or is the consensus that it's intrusive and not worth bothering with?
I really appreciate the better quality, especially audio. It's a huge step up from last year and makes the videos way more enjoyable to watch. Thanks for that!
As someone who only benefits from the pros and is not bothered by the cons, I can't tell you if it's worth it, but again, it is appreciated! :)
Best, Julian
-
Alex Henrie -
Henri Verbeet -
Jeff Hanson -
Julian Rüger