[Linux-aus] Thanks for the fish!

[Tim Bowden]

On Thu, 2003-02-06 at 08:07, Leon Brooks wrote:
> On Wednesday 05 February 2003 11:52 pm, Tim Bowden wrote:
> > As Stephen said please consider something like a 'power desktop users'
> > stream as opposed to just developer streams.  Perhaps this could have
> > topics like 'using advanced/ network features of X', 'X session
> > management', 'shell scripting tricks', 'building firewalls'...
> 
> Yes, but... it's _supposed_ to be a technical conference, it's _supposed_ to 
> be reasonably intimate (`me and 400 of my closest friends' is really pushing 
> it), it's _supposed_ to have deep and difficult stuff in it, Linus did attend 
> the deepest and most difficult stuff sessions at LCA2003.
> 
I agree this should remain the primary focus of lca,though I have to
admit lots of it was way over my head.  Even with keeping it 'deep &
difficult' the numbers are going to keep going up.  If perth drew 400 or
so then 500 is not an unreasonable estimate for 04- remember it is
closer to the big states, interest in linux growing, lca getting a
bigger name & so on.  Putting on a less developer oriented stream is
only going to make this worse.

> One possibility, a useful one since venues get much harder to find and much 
> more expensive per head when you have large numbers, is the run two 
> conferences side by side in the same city at once, a technical and a 
> not-so-technical (although I'm currently stuck for a non-condescending name 
> for the latter, maybe `Linux OnRamp?'), and allow delegates and speakers from 
> one to overflow into the other. For example, Rasmus could do a couple of 
> beginner and intermediate PHP sessions in the OnRamp conf, then trot across 
> to the `Deep Linux' session for some advanced PHP.
> 
Would it need to be two conf's?  Have a common registration, just put
the users stream(s) in a venue not too far away from the developers
(easy said, not so easily done).  Each morning there could be a
'developers' keynote and a 'users' keynote perhaps. Let people choose
from any stream as there would inevitably be quite a bit of overlap. 
The only problem would be opening and closing when everybody would be in
the one venue.  Perhaps the numbers would swell to 600 or 700.

> Managing that would be difficult, but I imagine that it could be done by 
> starting with a large committee, working out the broad strokes of a common 
> plan, then splitting the committee, each half trundling along independently, 
> fitting into the framework already decided upon, and only minor liason to 
> reduce conflict and duplication.
> 
> Cheers; Leon
> 

Tim Bowden