Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>>> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
>>> details have been posted at:
>>>
>>>   http://git-merge.com/
>>>
>>> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
>>> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
>>> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
>>> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>>>
>>>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>>> ...
>>>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>>> ...
>>> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
>>> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
>>> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
>>> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>>
>> I'd like the Git project to set up a more organized way to pay back
>> the travel costs and the conference fee to the developers who come.
>> For example the Git project could say that it will at least pay back:
>>
>> - all the travel costs to the 5 most important Git developers who come and ask,
>> - half the travel costs to the 5 next most important Git developers
>> who come and ask,
>> - all the conference fee to the 15 most important Git developers who
>> come and ask,
>>
>> I think it could help developers decide to come, and it looks like
>> enough funding could be available, thanks to GitHub and the GSoC
>> money. What do you think?
> 
> I personally perfer things to be kept informal---it would keep
> things simpler for everybody.  You do not have to wonder what you
> should do when you think you are among the five most important
> people and you also know your employer will pay for the conference
> if you asked, for example.
> 
> It feels to me that the suggestion Peff gave in his announce to ask
> privately for case-by-case arrangement strikes the balance much
> better.
> 
>> Apart from that it's also possible to find ways to accommodate some
>> developers for free, if they don't mind crashing in someone's spare
>> room.
>>
>> So please don't hesitate to ask if you would like to come.
> 
> These five lines, by not explicitly saying something like "the first
> 2 people who ask can crash in Christian's spare bedroom", is doing
> exactly the same thing as Peff did by saying "please talk to me
> off-list", it seems to me at least.  Both keep things informal and
> simple, and both arrange things on case-by-case basis as needed.
> 
> And I think that is better than setting a seemingly hard rules
> upfront, and causing more problems unnecessarily (e.g. who decides
> who are the 5 most important, for example?).