# Discussion: should Ada have its own FOSDEM DevRoom?
**URL:** https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194
**Category:** Events
**Created:** [September 11, 2024, 8:09am UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194 "2024-09-11T08:09:57Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 2
### Author:  [@egilhh](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/egilhh)
#### Post date: [September 25, 2024, 10:34am UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/21 "2024-09-25T10:34:06Z")
> [@Irvise](#):
>
> The latest Ada language definition
> was updated this year, giving birth to the Ada 2022 standard.
This bit needs rewriting
---
### Author:  [@Irvise](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise)
#### Post date: [September 25, 2024, 3:41pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/22 "2024-09-25T15:41:10Z")
> [@JC001](#):
>
> Possibly a mention that Ada is one of the few languages approved by the NSA would help.
> [@Lucretia](#):
>
> Mention the push by the us government towards wanting people to use safer languages.
Oh, sure I will!
> [@egilhh](#):
>
> This bit needs rewriting
Will do đ
---
### Author:  [@DirkCraeynest](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/DirkCraeynest)
#### Post date: [September 25, 2024, 5:50pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/23 "2024-09-25T17:50:08Z")
> [@Irvise](#):
>
> @DirkCraeynest, can I count with you?
Sure!
Thanks for taking the lead.
---
### Author:  [@cantanima](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/cantanima)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2024, 3:11pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/24 "2024-09-26T15:11:26Z")
in line with @JC001âs and @Lucretiaâs comments, perhaps mention [nvidia](https://www.adacore.com/nvidia)âs âtransition from C/C++ to SPARK for their security-critical software and firmware components.â
---
### Author:  [@Irvise](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise)
#### Post date: [September 26, 2024, 8:44pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/25 "2024-09-26T20:44:12Z")
Here is my rewrite of the âNotesâ and âWhy does this proposal fit FOSDEMâ
sections. I have also restructured it a bit and streamlined some parts.
Also, once again, should we ask for half a day and potentially increase our
chances? And is someone else interested in helping Dirk and I with the DevRoom?
* * *
Notes: Ada is a general-purpose programming language originally designed for
safety- and mission-critical software engineering. It is used extensively in air
traffic control, rail transportation, aerospace, nuclear, financial services,
medical devices, etc. It is also perfectly suited for open source development
with a fully open compiler (part of GCC), formal verification system and a
knowledgeable and vibrant community.
Awareness of safety and security issues in software systems is increasing. The
NSA recently published [1] a list of programming languages that are recommended
for the development of new software due to their memory safety and Ada was one
of the list (one of the three compiledb non-garbage collected
languages!). Therefore it should be no surprise that NVIDIA has started using
Ada/SPARK [2, 3] for their highest critical parts in their GPUs!
Multi-core platforms are now abundant and small, embedded devices are growing
exponentially. These are some of the reasons that the Ada programming language
and technology attracts more and more attention due to Adaâs support for
programming by contract, performant and efficient code, high- and low-level
abstractions and support for multi-core targets. The latest Ada language
definition was updated last year, giving birth to the Ada 2022 standard. Work on
new features is ongoing, such as improved support for fine-grained parallelism,
which were introduced in the new standard. The Ada-related technology, SPARK,
provides a complete solution for the safety and security aspects stated above
while being fully open-source, making it stand out from other formal
verification tools, as Ada/SPARK code is compiled directly into ready-to-run
programs, which can even run on embedded systems.
More and more tools are available, many are open source, including for small and
modern platforms. Interest in Ada keeps increasing, also in the open source
community, and many exciting projects have been created with Ada.
[1] [https://www.nsa.gov/Press-Room/News-Highlights/Article/Article/3215760/nsa-releases-guidance-on-how-to-protect-against-software-memory-safety-issues/](https://www.nsa.gov/Press-Room/News-Highlights/Article/Article/3215760/nsa-releases-guidance-on-how-to-protect-against-software-memory-safety-issues/)
[2] [NVIDIA: Adoption of SPARK Ushers in a New Era in⌠| AdaCore](https://www.adacore.com/papers/nvidia-adoption-of-spark-new-era-in-security-critical-software-development)
[3] [When Formal Verification with SPARK is the⌠| The AdaCore Blog](https://blog.adacore.com/when-formal-verification-with-spark-is-the-strongest-link)
Why does this proposal fit FOSDEM: The Ada DevRoom aims to facilitate a space
for Ada and non-Ada programmers to learn and share the features offered by the
Ada language (such as for object-oriented, multicore, formal verification or
embedded programming) as well as some of the many exciting tools and projects
using Ada.
Ada is one of the languages supported by GCC with a focus on correctness,
maintainability and easy of use. It also comes with a sister language, SPARK,
which focuses on formal proofs and analysis. These topics are becoming more
relevant as time passes. Which is why a lot of new languages, such as Rust or
Zig, have been created and try to improve the state of software development.
The tooling around Ada is open and has seen a great deal of development in the
past few years. Developers have also been creating new programs with it and
FOSDEM would be a wonderful choice for them to present and share their
work. FOSDEM is also used as a meeting opportunity for the Ada community to come
together and share their passion among fellow users and curious viewers who may
want to learn more about the Ada language and ecosystem.
---
### Author:  [@egilhh](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/egilhh)
#### Post date: [September 27, 2024, 9:04am UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/26 "2024-09-27T09:04:49Z")
> [@Irvise](#):
>
> Also, once again, should we ask for half a day and potentially increase our
> chances?
Even though I havenât been able to (physically) attend FOSDEM in the past, I have considered it each time thereâs been an Ada DevRoom. And although FOSDEM itself is free, plane tickets and hotel bills arenât. For me, a full day Ada DevRoom will help to justify the cost of attending, as I rarely find more than one or two talks in other DevRooms interesting enough
---
### Author:  [@Irvise](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2024, 9:12am UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/27 "2024-09-29T09:12:27Z")
> [@egilhh](#):
>
> Even though I havenât been able to (physically) attend FOSDEM in the past, I have considered it each time thereâs been an Ada DevRoom. And although FOSDEM itself is free, plane tickets and hotel bills arenât. For me, a full day Ada DevRoom will help to justify the cost of attending, as I rarely find more than one or two talks in other DevRooms interesting enough
Thank you for your reply. I agree that the cost of going to FOSDEM, specially for people who live abroad (like me), is quite high. And of course, something that adds value to the trip makes everything more palatable.
However, I have a worry here⌠If we try to get a full day DevRoom and we do not get it, the drawbacks to go to FOSDEM, because of/for Ada, are equally high. And if we do get a full day DevRoom but then people still do not show up (as you said, you have not been able to attend physically in the past), then there is no positive gainâŚ
I see this as a risk vs. reward problem. A half-day DevRoom makes it more likely that we will get it, but at the expense of making it less attractive to the Ada community. The full-day option I see it as less likely to happen but it makes Ada stand out quite a bit more. There is also the topic of filling a full day DevRoom with talks. With a half-day DevRoom it is much easier to get it full of high quality topics. A full day one may be more difficult or may require more niche/technical topics that may have lower impact on the general public (but will most likely be loved by Ada programmers).
Best regards,
Fer
---
### Author:  [@AJ-Ianozi](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/AJ-Ianozi)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2024, 3:05pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/28 "2024-09-29T15:05:52Z")
When you bear in mind that last year we werenât even afforded a stand, I feel like it might be worth playing it safe and trying to get a half day.
If a half day is a success, we can use that as a reason in 2026 to justify a full day (e.g. âwe are requesting a full day this year since last year not all of the presentations were able to make it in for a half-dayâ etc).
---
### Author:  [@pyj](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/pyj)
#### Post date: [September 29, 2024, 6:13pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/29 "2024-09-29T18:13:18Z")
I would make sure to point to things like the forum, for which the numbers and engagement is consistently growing.
---
### Author:  [@DirkCraeynest](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/DirkCraeynest)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2024, 5:58am UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/31 "2024-09-30T05:58:18Z")
> [@Irvise](#):
>
> A half-day DevRoom makes it more likely that we will get it
What makes you say that? In the past the majority of all DevRooms were full-day. And Ada has a track record of 10 full-day DevRooms and even one 2-day DevRoom, all filled with the maximum number of talks, and well attended.
Is there any indication that a half-day proposal has a higher chance of being accepted?
And as you say, a half-day DevRoom is less attractive to the Ada community. That includes potential presenters! We could get fewer proposals, because presenters might be reluctant to travel to Brussels when there are only a few other Ada talks instead of a full dayâŚ
IMHO, we should at least try to get a full day. In that respect, the final sentence of the current proposal is a good compromise. It states: _Special Requirements: If a full day is not possible, half a day could also be useful for us. But a full day is very much preferred._
Dirk
---
### Author:  [@Irvise](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise)
#### Post date: [September 30, 2024, 7:39pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/32 "2024-09-30T19:39:40Z")
> [@DirkCraeynest](#):
>
> What makes you say that? In the past the majority of all DevRooms were full-day. And Ada has a track record of 10 full-day DevRooms and even one 2-day DevRoom, all filled with the maximum number of talks, and well attended.
I think AJ said it best đ
> [@AJ-Ianozi](#):
>
> When you bear in mind that last year we werenât even afforded a stand, I feel like it might be worth playing it safe and trying to get a half day.
I wrote that Special Requirement these past two editions and I got no reply or question if it would be okay or something else⌠I am unsure if they are even reading that special requirement⌠I do not know how the choices are done at the FOSDEM board level, but I have the feeling that they all read the description an the amount of time requested, with not many noticing the note. Then they make a decision while building the final scheduleâŚ
I do not want the community to think that I am not in favour of a full-day DevRoom. But I want to increase the likelyhood that we will have something đ
It could be worth risking a full day and if not, having a stand and talks related to Ada in other Rooms though đ
Best,
Fer
---
### Author:  [@AJ-Ianozi](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/AJ-Ianozi)
#### Post date: [October 1, 2024, 8:50pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/33 "2024-10-01T20:50:46Z")
> [@DirkCraeynest](#):
>
> What makes you say that? In the past the majority of all DevRooms were full-day. And Ada has a track record of 10 full-day DevRooms and even one 2-day DevRoom, all filled with the maximum number of talks, and well attended.
We werenât afforded one in the last two years though (and we werenât even given a stand for '24). It wasnât just Ada though, [Haskell was also denied one](https://discourse.haskell.org/t/fosdem-2024-dates-announced-haskell-devroom-proposal/7561) so itâs possible that FOSDEM24 is having to make hard choices from an overabundance of requests or theyâre just trying to move away from language-centric rooms.
> [@DirkCraeynest](#):
>
> Is there any indication that a half-day proposal has a higher chance of being accepted?
I donât know for certain if requesting a half day would increase our chances (itâs quite possible we would be rejected for half-day too), but I do know that requesting a full day has not worked in the past 2 years.
> [@DirkCraeynest](#):
>
> And as you say, a half-day DevRoom is less attractive to the Ada community. That includes potential presenters! We could get fewer proposals, because presenters might be reluctant to travel to Brussels when there are only a few other Ada talks instead of a full dayâŚ
We cannot directly influence whether they give us a dev room (though we could â theoretically â indirectly influence it by requesting a half day).
What we can directly influence is our showing (I even flew out from the USA for FOSDEM24 despite everything, just to show my support for the community and show them we still exist!).
> [@DirkCraeynest](#):
>
> IMHO, we should at least try to get a full day. In that respect, the final sentence of the current proposal is a good compromise. It states: _Special Requirements: If a full day is not possible, half a day could also be useful for us. But a full day is very much preferred._
Weâve tried this in the last two years but to no avail. Perhaps we should be putting it in a different section of the application and still apply for a full day. Worst case scenario is that we simply donât get a dev room and we put our focus into presentations (which is what this topic originally prompted).
Iâm not against trying for a full day, I just believe that half a day may increase the chances of getting our foot back in the door (at which point we can fight for a full day next year armed with evidence that the half day was successful).
It may be worth talking through all of this at the ada meeting this weekend, perhaps?
> [@pyj](#):
>
> I would make sure to point to things like the forum, for which the numbers and engagement is consistently growing.
This is a great point.
---
### Author:  [@Irvise](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise)
#### Post date: [October 7, 2024, 9:21pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/34 "2024-10-07T21:21:36Z")
Dear all,
I just made the submission for a full day devroom. Here is the text that I submitted, though keep in mind that it can still change:
* * *
â Notes ----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Note: Preferred slot: Full day (Saturday). If it is not available, 2nd best option: half day (Saturday afternoon).]]
Ada is a general-purpose programming language originally designed for embedded
and mission-critical software engineering, although nowadays it also supports
object orientation, contracts and formal verification. It is used extensively in
air traffic control, rail transportation, aerospace, nuclear, financial
services, medical devices, etc. It is also perfectly suited for open source
development with a fully open compiler (part of GCC), formal verification system
and a knowledgeable and vibrant community.
Awareness of safety and security issues in software systems is increasing. The
NSA recently published [1] a list of programming languages that are recommended
for the development of new software due to their memory safety and Ada was one
of the list (one of the three compiled non-garbage collected languages!). In
that context, it should be no surprise that NVIDIA has started using Ada/SPARK
[2, 3] for their highest critical parts in their GPUs! The forums [4] have also
seen an uptick of new users since the NSA announcement.
Multi-core platforms are now abundant and small, embedded devices are growing
exponentially. These are some of the reasons that the Ada programming language
and technology attracts more and more attention due to Adaâs support for
programming by contract, performant and efficient code, high- and low-level
abstractions and support for multi-core targets. The latest Ada language
definition, Ada 2022, was approved by ISO as an international standard last
year. Work on implementing the new features is ongoing, such as improved support
for fine-grained parallelism, which were introduced in the new standard. The
Ada-related technology, SPARK, provides a complete solution for the safety and
security aspects stated above while being fully open source, making it stand out
from other formal verification tools, as Ada/SPARK code is compiled directly
into ready-to-run programs, which can even run on embedded systems.
More and more tools are available, many are open source, including for small and
modern platforms. Interest in Ada keeps increasing, also in the open source
community, and many exciting projects have been created with Ada.
[1] [https://www.nsa.gov/Press-Room/News-Highlights/Article/Article/3215760/nsa-releases-guidance-on-how-to-protect-against-software-memory-safety-issues/](https://www.nsa.gov/Press-Room/News-Highlights/Article/Article/3215760/nsa-releases-guidance-on-how-to-protect-against-software-memory-safety-issues/)
[2] [NVIDIA: Adoption of SPARK Ushers in a New Era in⌠| AdaCore](https://www.adacore.com/papers/nvidia-adoption-of-spark-new-era-in-security-critical-software-development)
[3] [When Formal Verification with SPARK is the⌠| The AdaCore Blog](https://blog.adacore.com/when-formal-verification-with-spark-is-the-strongest-link)
[4] [https://forum.ada-lang.io/](https://forum.ada-lang.io/)
â Preferred slot -------------------------------------------------------------
Saturday
â Why does this proposal fit FOSDEM ------------------------------------------
The Ada devroom aims to facilitate a space for Ada and non-Ada programmers to
learn and share the features offered by the Ada language (such as for
object-oriented, multicore, formal verification or embedded programming) as well
as some of the many exciting tools and projects using Ada.
Ada is one of the languages supported by GCC with a focus on correctness,
maintainability and easy of use. It also comes with a sister language, SPARK,
which focuses on formal proofs and analysis. These topics are becoming more
relevant as time passes. Which is why a lot of new languages, such as Rust or
Zig, have been created and try to improve the state of software development.
The tooling around Ada is open and has seen a great deal of development in the
past few years. Developers have also been creating new programs with it and
FOSDEM would be a wonderful choice for them to present and share their
work. FOSDEM is also useful both as a meeting opportunity for the Ada community
to come together and share their passion among fellow users, as well as for
curious viewers who may want to learn more about the Ada language and ecosystem.
â Submitters affinity to the topic -------------------------------------------
I (Fernando) first attended FOSDEM with a presentation in 2021 (A (very) quick
overview of libre mechanical software).
I then succeeded Dirk Craeynest as the coordinator for the Ada devroom in FOSDEM
2022 as I had fallen in love with Ada the years prior. It was my first year as a
coordinator and I would like to continue as such. In FOSDEM 2023, as the Ada
devroom was not chosen, I helped organise the Ada stand, called âItâs time to
learn Ada!â, with the help of Tama McGlinn. In 2024 we were also not chosen to
have a devroom. In the 2025 edition of FOSDEM I will be helped by Dirk
Craeynest, who was the coordinator of the Ada devroom in earlier years, and
A. J. Ianozi, a prolific Ada hacker and creator or GetAda, a Rustup-like tool
for Ada.
In terms of my personal involvement with Ada, I tend to focus mostly on
fostering a sustainable and healthy community. For example, in June 2024 I gave
a talk in the Ada Developers Workshop, which took place during the Ada-Europe
International Conference, about community advocacy. The slides can be found in
[1, 2] and the recording in [3]. Oh, and I was also the main organiser of the
Workshop! But my day to day life with Ada revolves around fixing bugs and
answering people in the forums [4] (my nick is Irvise).
[1] [Ada-Europe 2024 - Ada Developers Workshop](http://www.ada-europe.org/conference2024/adadev.html)
[2] [http://www.ada-europe.org/conference2024/presentations/Ada\_Community\_Advocacy.pdf](http://www.ada-europe.org/conference2024/presentations/Ada_Community_Advocacy.pdf)
[3] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAFlWVsLM-I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAFlWVsLM-I)
[4] [https://forum.ada-lang.io/](https://forum.ada-lang.io/)
â Relevant URLs --------------------------------------------------------------
FOSDEM 2019 Ada devroom [FOSDEM 2019 - Ada devroom](https://archive.fosdem.org/2019/schedule/track/ada/)
FOSDEM 2020 Ada devroom [FOSDEM 2020 - Ada devroom](https://archive.fosdem.org/2020/schedule/track/ada/)
FOSDEM 2022 Ada devroom [FOSDEM 2022 - Ada devroom](https://archive.fosdem.org/2022/schedule/track/ada/)
Ada-Lang website [https://ada-lang.io/](https://ada-lang.io/)
Ada-Lang forums [https://forum.ada-lang.io](https://forum.ada-lang.io)
Personal profile of the forums [Profile - Irvise - Ada Forum](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise/activity)
* * *
I wonât be available this week, so I wonât answer your replies, though I hope to be able to read them.
Best regards and lets hope for the best,
Fer
---
### Author:  [@DirkCraeynest](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/DirkCraeynest)
#### Post date: [October 22, 2024, 4:34pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/35 "2024-10-22T16:34:25Z")
Quick update: I just received notification that our proposal for an Ada DevRoom has been accepted! More info is expected shortly.
---
### Author:  [@AJ-Ianozi](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/AJ-Ianozi)
#### Post date: [October 23, 2024, 12:09am UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/36 "2024-10-23T00:09:20Z")
Yep! We got the dev room! This is so exciting!
---
### Author:  [@Micronian2](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Micronian2)
#### Post date: [October 23, 2024, 5:32am UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/37 "2024-10-23T05:32:30Z")
AWESOME! Such wonderful news! đđđđ
---
### Author:  [@kevlar700](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/kevlar700)
#### Post date: [October 23, 2024, 2:37pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/38 "2024-10-23T14:37:05Z")
> [@Irvise](#):
>
> Notes: Ada is a general-purpose programming language originally designed
> for safety- and mission-critical software engineering. It is used
> extensively in air traffic control, rail transportation, aerospace,
> nuclear, financial services, medical devices, etc. It is also perfectly
> suited for open source development.
Fantastic news about getting a full day dev room.
I have a little nitpick with this. It is fine to say Ada is often used in safety and mission critical etc. today but the original MIL-STD-1815 A Foreword states.
âAda is the result of a collective effort to design a common language for programming large scale and real-time systemsâ
I canât imagine how many hours of consideration went into that and so it is probably right to preserve it as what Ada was designed to do.
I would personally mention maintenance and cost effectiveness in relation to âlarge scaleâ.
---
### Author:  [@Irvise](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise)
#### Post date: [October 23, 2024, 4:31pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/39 "2024-10-23T16:31:40Z")
Hi all,
you know the news so I wonât repeat them.
However, I would like to say that if someone is interested in lending a hand and helping with the organisation of the Devroom, feel free to tell us! The team right now is composed by Dirk, AJ and myself.
Best,
Fer
P.S: I will get started writing a draft or the Call for Presentations (copy pasting from past years)
---
### Author:  [@Irvise](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Irvise)
#### Post date: [October 23, 2024, 4:36pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/40 "2024-10-23T16:36:10Z")
Ah! And I would recommend anybody who would like to have news about the Ada Devroom outside of this forum, should sign up for the ADAFOSDEM@LS.KULEUVEN.BE Mailing list. Link here: [LISTSERV - ADAFOSDEM Archives - LS.KULEUVEN.BE](https://ls.kuleuven.be/cgi-bin/wa?A0=ADAFOSDEM)
---
### Author:  [@Lucretia](https://forum.ada-lang.io/u/Lucretia)
#### Post date: [October 23, 2024, 5:32pm UTC](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194/41 "2024-10-23T17:32:52Z")
> [@Irvise](#):
>
> outside of this forum, should sign up for the ADAFOSDEM@LS.KULEUVEN.BE Mailing list. Link here: [LISTSERV - ADAFOSDEM Archives - LS.KULEUVEN.BE](https://ls.kuleuven.be/cgi-bin/wa?A0=ADAFOSDEM)
> You are not authorized to view the archives with the email address you used to log in.
[Previous page](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194.md?page=1)
[Next page](https://forum.ada-lang.io/t/discussion-should-ada-have-its-own-fosdem-devroom/1194.md?page=3)