[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Subject Index][Thread Index]
Re: A Suggestion
A very good thought indeed. In fact, LUGs are independent bodies in
themselves and there is no central authority. Since the linux-india.org has
taken up the task of representing Linux in India, it would do them good not
to come in the role of regional politics and give the links to all LUGs.
Afterall, even if there is a split, the ultimate aim of the Linux movement
is anyway fulfilled;that of propagating a better OS and helping people out.
Indulging in petty politics would only result in mud-slinging and
If providing links is difficult, then the concerned UGs dont need
to despair as they can utilise other Ssearch engine skills to get a decent
listing on the engines. In other countries, there are often two or more user
groups (collaborating ofcourse) at each side of big cities. Thus, this
shouldnt be a BIG problem.
----- Original Message -----
From: Nagarjuna G. <nagarjun@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 12:54 PM
Subject: [LIG] A Suggestion
> A split in a LUG (or any group for that matter) is a possible event,
> though each of us know it is unfortunate. Since most lugs are just a
> group of people interested in linux or a flavour of linux, LI should
> not have any problems in recognizing all of them. Recognition here
> means only to add a link to their website and mailing list. When LI
> becomes a registered body, if both the split groups join as members,
> LI should not have any problems in accepting their membership either.
> It will be administratively very difficult to monitor and give
> recognition to only one LUG in each city/town. My intention is not to
> encourage more splits. I only wish to say that it is unnecessary
> `headache' for LI to wait till the split groups become one.
> But, when the question arises to whom should the domian (such as
> city.linux-india.org.in) be given, we will end up in a problem.
> Atul's problem, as I understand, is precisely this. In such a
> situation instead of recognising only one group, it is better to give
> distinct names (which does not reflect any priority/superiority in the
> names) and serve both the domains. The names could be same as their
> mailing list name or domain name. It will be very difficult to decide
> for LI to choose one in favour of the other. Criteria like,
> performance, number of memebers, date of creation would all be
> arbitrary, and hence LI should not worry to choose one among the
> others. Just serve all the links and leave it to the community to
> choose and decide.
> I would like to know if something is escaping my attention. One
> problem can be to know how REAL is the split? It is here possibly LI
> may have to spare some thought before deciding or recognising the
> different groups. What problems would arise if LI does as I suggested
> An alpha version of a web based tool to manage
> your subscription with this mailing list is at