On Fri, 2004-01-09 at 02:16, Jeff Waugh wrote: > You did. The crucial difference is that by doing it at LCA, all interested > parties were able to sit down and talk it out. Potential hosts, previous > hosts and at last year's at least, the committee. Sure, it reduces the lead > time organisers get for the event, but if an equivalent process with as much > involvement can be found (as you suggested in your next para), I would be > happy to support it. But I personally feel, particularly after being one of > the linux.conf.au organisers in 2001, that this is a very important... hm... > tradition or institution to keep alive. Point taken, but there's also the argument (esp now) that organising the conf is taking *more* than a year (there's already melb people starting to think about, talk about and plan for 06). Maybe a mailing list for past organisers could be useful for such discussions (and seeking advice)? > > I think you've just convinced me that regular summaries/newsletter type > > things are a Real Good Idea(tm) to keep the communication levels up. > > Good, good, good. Enquiring minds want to know. And I want you guys to say > stuff so people stop assuming that I know everything through Pia. I don't. hahaha - know that one :) okay - sounds like more summaries and news items will be useful. bug me (cron emails are fine) for them if they're too long in coming. -- Stewart Smith (stewart@linux.org.au) Vice President, Linux Australia
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part