[Linux-aus] Spaghetti at the wall: LCA thoughts

[Mary Gardiner]

Hi all,

Coming out of LCA 2012, I thought it might be productive to have a
speculative "how LCA could change for the better" thread, a big picture
kind of thing that could perhaps inform the next five years of LCA.

Disclaimer: I enjoyed LCA 2012, and I hope this email isn't hurtful to
recent LCA organisers. It's not intended, and I hope won't be read, as a
slam or even a criticism of past LCAs. I just think that every so often
with a huge project like LCA a bit of brainstorming could help it
continue to improve.

I also realise that much of the stuff I am talking about here is
actually too big picture for 2013, who've already had to do a lot of
concrete planning and locking things in. It's really intended for 2014
and later.

Finally: brainstorming style, I'm just throwing ideas at the wall here
to see what sticks. Perhaps others would like to do the same, while of
course appreciating that LA and LCA are run by mere humans who cannot
make all our dreams come true.

Unconference/hallway track
--------------------------

I know it's been done on and off, and I know it's partly a cost/venue
problem, but I continue to wish that the hallway track could become more
official: seating, power, breakout rooms, unconference and/or sprint or
hack days, something of that nature. Possibly even at the expense of the
main event to some degree.

Continuity
----------

I have sometimes wondered if LCA bids should be for two years. That is,
you bid to hold the conference in your city two years running. This
structure is used by some other FOSS conferences, including quite large
ones like US PyCon (which has IIRC 2000+ attendees).

The main advantage to this is re-using work in the second year of the
conference: unless there was a serious problem you use the same venue,
accommodation, social venues, A/V hire, at least a core group of
volunteers, etc.

The flow-on effect of this is some potential for conference innovation
in the second year of the event. In your first year, I gather, it's hard
enough to run even a template LCA event at the expected quality, let
alone significantly innovate with, eg, different social events or talk
structures or similar. It has happened of course (miniconfs in 2003,
April conference in 2005, Open Day in 2007, night market dinner in 2008,
four day conference in 2012 and undoubtedly stuff I am forgetting most
other years) but it might increase somewhat under this model.

It would also be a net saving on work: a new team only needs to be
assembled and brought up to speed every second year.

Finally, because the core bits of the conference would be more routine
by the second year, it might allow inexperienced or time-pressed
volunteers to learn the ropes in the second year without having to make
everything up as they go along, growing more community members for the
future.

The very obvious downside is the amount of work this involves: many lead
LCA organisers have had to put their work or personal lives in deep
freeze for their LCA year in a way that may not even really be
sustainable for one year, let alone two. It also precludes some people
from getting involved as a lead, because they can't commit to their
circumstances remaining stable for two years. It might for example
require some additional support from LA in hiring paid staff to assist
or seconding the lead organiser part-time for the duration or something
of that nature.

-Mary