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