[Linux-aus] Videoing LUG Talks
sridhar at dhanapalan.com
Thu Feb 7 22:08:13 UTC 2008
On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
> Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote:
> > On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Anthony Towns <aj at azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> >> So unless I'm misunderstanding something, this policy _doesn't_ exist.
> > I'm going by what I've been told by others who have looked into it.
> > Seemingly there's been a communications breakdown somewhere.
> > Now that we all know better, we can move forwards. What we can learn from
> > this is that LA's resources to LUGs are not clearly understood. I've
> > replied to Steve off-list to see what can be done in this particular
> > instance, but we need to make sure this sort of confusion can't happen
> > again.
> No. I think what we should learn is that trusting gossip instead of
> asking people who actually know is a bad plan.
You're basically saying the same thing as myself, albeit in a less tactful
This 'gossip' is merely a symptom of an unclear policy. If it had been made
unambiguous in the first place, there would have been no room for
So far, in this thread alone I've been told at least three slightly different
things, which make sense when pieced together but which can be confusing
Local groups should be able to know _exactly_ what's available to them, and
how to get it. This can be as simple as a Web page explaining the basics.
I'm not interested in finger pointing. Let's get this fixed to help our
"Once you realise that documentation should be laughed at, peed upon, put on
fire, and just ridiculed in general, THEN, and only then, have you reached
the level where you can safely read it and try to use it to actually
implement a driver." - Linus Torvalds
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.linux.org.au/pipermail/linux-aus/attachments/20080208/2be3ba4a/attachment.pgp
More information about the linux-aus