On 9/25/06, Eric Shubes <plug@shubes.net> wrote:
>
> Hey Larry (Dazed_75),
>
> Any idea how this might integrate with the EVALUG group? I'm thinking
> there
> might be some sort of synergy here. Perhaps we can knock around ideas at
> this month's meeting.
>

Eric,

Integrating with EVALUG might be problematical in that it is mostly retirees
and a number of winter only folks.  Also, I do not know enough about the
goals of a LoCo to know if we have enough technical know-how.  OTOH, the
group did make a decision to standardize on Ubuntu so it might make a fair
module to the kernel (sorry, I could not resist).  I think we have a fairly
full agenda for the October and November meetings but I am sure we could fit
in some discussion.

Frankly, the SLUG portion of EVALUG could be a better focus if they wanted
to participate since they meet weekly and seem to be more active than most
of the rest of EVALUG.  Again, maybe we should have some discussion at the
October meeting presuming we can find the time.

Others,

Regardless of how it began and has existed, I see PLUG as a wonderful and
generic resource.  I agree with others that it cannot show favoritism to any
distro and (IMHO) survive as that kind of an entity.  That said, I see no
reason it should not associate with various subgroups like LOPSA, EVALUG,
RubyOnRails, the Developer group, etc which it seems to do well.

It seems the only big issues here is the formalism of an Ubuntu LoCo.  Even
if that formalism were to cause it to be a separate entity because of PLUG
member concerns or LoCo approval, I see no reason it can't be associated in
the same way as those other groups thereby maintaining the PLUG atmosphere.
In that way, I see the discussion being primarily whether its organizers and
workers (because there is potentially a lot of work) are in any way
sponsored by PLUG.

Let the flames begin. :)
-- 
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter
and those who matter don't mind.  - Dr. Seuss