[Linux-aus] [Fwd: Re: [AUUG-Talk]: Query about "unincorporated successor AUUG's" and AUUGs domain]

Paul Antoine pma-la at milleng.com.au
Sun Feb 17 10:49:24 UTC 2008

Steve is correct in his assertion as to the rationale for AUUG of days 
gone by. Of course there was also a good deal of geeky content at AUUG 
at least in the very early days before Unix became a mainstream 
commercial OS. Many of the people involved in those early days of AUUG 
were also involved in Unix kernel development.  Indeed Linus' first trip 
to Aus was to go to an AUUG conference as I remember.

Steve is also correct wrt membership of LUG's... in particular in my 
experience with PLUG here in Perth.  Most PLUG attendees are "average 
new Linux user" types in need of help with Linux on the desktop. That 
said there seem to be professional users on the PLUG mailing list but I 
get the feeling that most of them are also members of SAGE where their 
professional needs (war stories, product updates, etc.) are met.

It's not unusual to have to go to overseas conferences to meet one's 
professional development needs so what's the problem with Australian 
Unix professionals having to do so for topics thus far catered to by 
AUUG?  I go overseas for conferences for which there's no Australian 
equivalent as do many others (even regular AUUG or linux.conf.au 
attendees) whether "professional" or developers or whatever.

If AUUG is dying I feel linux.conf.au and Linux Australia have no 
obligation to fulfill AUUG's prior focus and might do well to completely 
avoid it on principal.  That way the AUUG aficionados can quietly find 
another venue if/when AUUG dies and we can all stop discussing trying to 
please everybody...

Just my 5c (no 2c coins now!),

David Lloyd wrote:
> Discuss.
> I would recommend that Linux Australia simply ignore AUUG. It's dying 
> anyway.
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [AUUG-Talk]: Query about "unincorporated successor 
> AUUG's" and	AUUGs domain
> Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:38:21 +1100
> From: steve jenkin <sjenkin at canb.auug.org.au>
> To: talk at auug.org.au
> CC: David Lloyd <lloy0076 at adam.com.au>
> References: <20080215000531.GA14839 at members.tip.net.au> 
> <20080215024735.GF69115 at dereel.lemis.com> 
> <47B58257.9090604 at adam.com.au> 
> <24EB31AA-A48A-442E-95D8-6E70FE7AA29F at iagu.net> 
> <20080215000531.GA14839 at members.tip.net.au> 
> <20080215024735.GF69115 at dereel.lemis.com> 
> <47B58257.9090604 at adam.com.au> <47B62F53.6020506 at canb.auug.org.au> 
> <20080216061244.GA7879 at dereel.lemis.com>
> Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote on 16/2/08 5:12 PM:
>> Your information is a little out of date, as I would have expected you
>> to know.  Many of the Linux people I know are *very* professional.
> Greg, Are you stupid, or do you just try to rile people with craziness
> like this??
> Are you saying (w.r.t. '*very* professional') that all people in LUG's
> are 'professionals' and that all professional topics will be answered by
> any LUG?
> If you are, you live in a very different Universe to me - and one where
> AUUG was long superceeded.
> If you aren't, then why the putdown and rejection of my proposal?
> AUUG has, since incorporation, provided a focus/forum for people using
> Unix systems professionally.
> That is, they are paid to do stuff with Unix and the (Unix) work they do
> is for *others*.
> I.e. AUUG == Unix at Work.
> That is not just a long way from the LUG I know, but anti-ethical to it.
> LUGs tend to focus on people who own & run Linux for themselves.
> Look at linux.conf.au - it does *not* have a work focus, it is all about
> the technology.
> That doesn't mean that people who earn their living from Linux & Unix
> aren't there, just that the conference isn't primarily catering for them
> or their special interests...
> There *might* be people in the LUG who are *also* do Linux
> 'professionally' (by my defn.: paid & for-others).
> But I don't and wouldn't consider my local LUG as my primary resource
> for discussing 'professional' questions.
> Things like security, DR & contingency planning, legal liabilities,
> privacy act, contract rates, support contracts, vendor agreements,
> product comparisons, service providers, maintenance orgs, HVAC &
> physical security, offsite-backups, telcos, volume discounts, ... -
> these are all topics that arise & get discussed within the
> paid-employment context - and I would consider out of bounds for a LUG.
>> You could certainly start with your mates at Ozlabs for the first
>> scenario, but in general you're right, just for other reasons.
> So all the people in Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Hobart etc can
> just mooch on down to Canberra and have a jolly little chinwag with my
> mates in Ozlabs??
> That not only doesn't scale, but is also patently absurd to suggest in
> the context of a discussion on the future of AUUG - this was not "what
> steve wants for himself."
> What I was trying to illustrate was:
>   - there is more than one Unix, the world-of-work is far from Linux only
>   - for paid-work systems there are many important non-free programs -
> often non-linux
>   - there are many paid-work problems that I haven't seen discussed on my
> local LUG. For owner-operator and small installations, many of the
> problems just don't arise - and discussions aren't relevant or
> appropriate on a LUG.

More information about the linux-aus mailing list