<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jul 2, 2017 at 5:45 AM, Philip Reames via cfe-dev <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">cfe-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="m_2984263304381095815moz-cite-prefix">Joining in a bit late, but given the
conversation which happened down thread I want to make a point of
saying this.<br>
<br>
Tanya, thank you for all of the work you put into LLVM dev each
year. I have greatly enjoyed the conference year after year and
get a lot out of attending. It is currently the only tech
conference which I attend as a routine matter of course. For an
event of it's size, the conference usually goes exceedingly
smoothly. <br>
<br>
I want to explicitly call out the work which has gone in to
keeping the conference accessible to all. A $300 price is well
within budget for most of attendees, and the foundation has made
sure to offer reduced student and need based rates. The focus on
doing that later bit says good things about the organization and
the folks involved in running it. I know for that for me, the
benefits I receive by attending far outweigh the cost. <br>
<br>
It is unfortunate that attendance has to be capped. It seems like
demand has increased a lot the last couple of years. However, I
do want to call out the efforts which have gone into making most
of the content of the technical tracks available to a much wider
audience. All of the effort to post recording of talks is
subsidized by the local attendees and the organizers have ensured
the content is available not too long after the conference. That
is itself a huge investment in making the event accessible to
those who can't attend in person. <br>
<br>
Tanya, one thing which might help prevent concerns like those
raised would be to have an open discussion of where the funds are
going. Is there a publicly available budget document for last
years conference you can point to?<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I say this with a soft tone..<br><br></div><div>I think it's very anti-open source to have foundations behind projects them with no or little transparency making decisions which seem more corporate focused. (It isn't to say it's wrong or not the right approach, but there's some philosophical "feelings" tied to it)<br><br></div><div>transparency isn't only about where the money is spent.. It's about how decisions are made, how the secret board conducts things.. the meeting minutes. etc.. There's a time and place for discretion, but everything secret by default doesn't seem like the Right Way (tm)...<br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div>