<div id="geary-body" dir="auto"><div>Thank you, Russell, for that clarification.</div></div><div id="geary-signature" dir="auto"><div>--</div>David Crosswell<div>Telaman Consultancies</div><div>P.O. Box 477</div><div>100 Edward Street</div><div>Charleville 4077</div><div>Queensland</div><div>Australia</div><div><br></div><div>https://www.telaman.net.au</div></div><div id="geary-quote" dir="auto"><br>On Thu, Oct 13, 2022 at 11:55, Russell Stuart via linux-aus <linux-aus@lists.linux.org.au> wrote:<br><blockquote type="cite"><div class="plaintext" style="white-space: pre-wrap;">On 13/10/22 09:29, Craige McWhirter via linux-aus wrote:
<blockquote>At this juncture it looks to me like LA comittee and the community have
formally parted ways?
</blockquote>
I'm responding to this even though I will probably be frowned upon by my fellow LA executive members.
It's possible LA and the community have parted ways. I don't know for sure. But if so, it's the community that's changed, not LA.
LA is doing what it has always done. It funds open source conferences. For those of you who don't know, it works roughly like this: a bunch of bunnies decide they want to do the work of running a conference on a volunteer basis, they approach LA for funding and logistics, LA makes them jump through some hoops to prove it's likely the conference won't make a loss (I can't recall a proposal that didn't make it through the hoops), and it happens.
The reason there is no LCA 2023 is no one put up a proposal to run it. In fact no one put up a proposal to run LCA 2022 either. You seem to be thinking this was a deliberate choice by LA. The evidence in the public domain says otherwise - LA repeatedly asked for bids to run LCA 2023 (and LCA 2022), and got none.
What "LA" did receive this year, after it was obvious the community wasn't interested in running LCA 2023, was a proposal to run OE 2023. The proposal was formally voted on last night, and I voted yes. Not because I prefer OE format over LCA 2023 (I don't) but on the grounds I always use - do the bunnies look like a dedicated mob that will see it through to the end, is it somehow related to open source, and is it unlikely to make a loss. The proposal clearly met all those criteria.
The LA above is in quotes because the people who put up the proposal are mostly the LA exec. Mostly, because I'm one of the lazy ones. I was only vaguely aware my somewhat secretive fellow exec members were thinking of it, and have had no involvement in it˙s planning. When they delivered their formal budget to LA the secret was out of course, because as treasurer of LA I took a long hard look at the budget they put up, followed up on costings and quotes. But that˙s no different to any other conference proposal.
I have no inside information on what their motivations for doing it or choosing the format that did. But the motivations aren't hard to guess - I know all of them are die hard fans of open source conferences and they didn't want to see COVID kill Australia's tradition of having them. I have absolutely no idea what drove the format change, but here the golden rule of open source applies: he who does the work makes the rules. It's not the first time a radically different format for LCA was proposed. The only difference is on previous occasions, LA has always had an alternate proposal to run a "traditional" LCA alongside the radical one, and historically it's *always* chosen the traditional proposal. But that choice wasn't available this time.
If you, or anyone feels strongly that LCA should come back you can make it happen. I think LA is one of open source hidden treasures, literally. If you come to LA with a proposal to run an open source conference, LA will loan you a years salary (a Google employee's salary even) to make it happen. LA asks for no security, or anything else beyond your word it's going to be a great open source conference run prudently. If it all goes sour (and it has), then LA wears the loss without complaint, and has in the past funded the same conference the next year. Partially because of LA's corporate reputation, you are likely to attract sponsors that will fund most of it. It's almost like an open invitation to have an open source bash for you and your mates at the corporate sponsors expense. And if you pull it off, you˙ll learn a lot about your craft, realise somewhat to your amazement you are capable of creating and organising a team of 100 people that work together to deliver something fantastic, and earn the accolades of everyone who attends