[Linux-aus] Council Meeting Minutes - 2011-02-03

[Russell Stuart]

On Fri, 2011-02-04 at 11:27 +1100, James Purser wrote:
> What territorial issues? Getting access to the mirror should be as
> simple as sending a request to the mirror team, either via email, irc
> or beer.   

They happened.  Not often, but they did.  I have my own opinions on why
they happened.  These opinions probably reflect my own biases as much as
they reflect reality, so to be fair to the people involved I rather not
discuss them.

> Sigh, look. LCA is an LA event. They are not separate entities. If LA
> requires the videos be put on the mirror first, then that's where they
> go. 

I was reacting to the tone of the line in the minutes.  That was
probably wrong as it is just a one line summary quickly jotted down.
Nonetheless the above again reeks of that tone.  I guess what you are
saying if there are two otherwise equal paths the conference should go
down, then LA gets to decide.  Of course it does.  They are the elected
body.

The two paths are not equal right now though.  So if nobody does do the
work, what would LA prefer - no video or very delayed video, or it goes
to some other server first as it did this time?  To me the answer looks
pretty straight forward.  Yet the tone of your message above and the
minutes seems to imply LA would prefer the "no video or delayed video"
option.  This is probably just a miss understanding on my part, but
nonetheless it is what prompted my response.

I probably should also go on record here and say from my point of view
(I can't and don't speak for the team), what few gentle nudges and
requests I saw LA give to the LCA team this year seemed entirely
appropriate to me.  It was all very constructive.

> Agreed, multiple locations is always good. In fact given the Internode
> has routinely mirrored the conf videos, adding blip as another mirror
> is not a bad idea. Making it the prime location is.   

Just to be clear: I wasn't disagreeing that in principle LA mirror
should be the primary upload site.

> Seriously, people are very impressed with the speed and quality of the
> videos. Kudos to the video team for that. We're also very well aware
> of the stresses the LCA organisers are subject to. The only problem I
> and others have is with the decision to use blip over the existing
> infrastructure. 

Beware that wasn't a deliberate choice by the LCA 2011 team.  It
happened that way because parts of the video processing were done by
outside volunteers to which we are both deeply indebted and
appreciative.  They supplied the software.  If that software isn't
changed, I suspect all the demands in the world to upload the videos to
LA's mirror first aren't going to make it happen.