[Linux-aus] LCA2014 update

Silvia Pfeiffer silvia at silvia-pfeiffer.de
Wed Aug 29 11:01:18 EST 2012

On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 1:26 AM, James Bromberger <james at rcpt.to> wrote:
> Let me first have a word on mini-confs. They were originally supposed to be
> zero load on the LCA organisers; *IMHO* they should simply be a confirmation
> that there's a room somewhere that can be used for $project WHILE the LCA
> organisers set up. There should be no expectation that LCA starts when the
> mini confs start I think over time they've become the tutorial preludes of
> LCA. Perhaps to keep them simple, they should be a 'no budget', 'no
> sponsorship' track (they shouldn't need that, and they shouldn't draw
> sponsorship away from LCA). Any mini conf presentation that has a wide
> audience appeal than should be bumped up to the main conf.

On the miniconfs: no miniconf has ever received any budget from LCA,
nor sponsorship. I just wanted to make sure that's clear to the
The only "financial support" that miniconfs get is that the main
organiser gets into LCA for free. Some years have also seen them
invited to the speakers dinner, but that's not a give.
Things that LCA does do for miniconfs, which are great:
* select miniconfs
* schedule miniconf days
* chase the organisers to ascertain the programs are ready for LCA
* more recently: provide slots for the days so ppl can move between
the miniconfs more easily
* more recently even: prescribe the CFP and submission deadlines
(which is also great synchronization)

None of this is really that much work.

In fact,you could run LCA just as a collection of miniconfs. Makes the
job of the paper committee really simple and reduces the LCA
organisers to "merely" supplying the venues, website and registration,
and social events if necessary. But then that's the main things they
do anyway...

In short: I don't have a solution, but cutting around on the miniconfs
and the talks is targeting the "reduce the effort" bit at the wrong


More information about the linux-aus mailing list