dank06 at kegel.com
Tue Feb 6 08:48:15 CST 2007
On 2/6/07, Jeremy White <jwhite at winehq.org> wrote:
> Wasn't [your] original idea to have 2 (or more?) official
> Wineconf sites, linked by video conferencing equipment?
> That does have challenges; time zone sync is a hard one,
> for starters. Further, you lose much of the value of
> the plain old socializing we do (i.e. they don't
> have video conferencing service in the pubs :-/).
> But if it lets a bunch of people get together who
> wouldn't have otherwise, I don't see how it could be bad.
Well, let me make two concrete proposals:
All the presentations would take place in Amsterdam, but
would be available remotely in two ways:
presentation slides up ahead of time on the wineconf site, and
videotaped talks on YouTube for viewing a couple hours later.
Hopefully the talks in Amsterdam would be available for viewing
the next day on YouTube.
Taping, editing, and uploading the talks would be a challenge,
you would want one person doing the recording, and a second
person doing the editing and uploading (presumably during the
next talk.) It'd be quite a trick if it worked. (I tried taping
the 2006 talks, and both my camerawork and my audio were
lousy; maybe I could practice on some local events to refine my
Alternately, the meeting could be held at the Amsterdam office
of a company with good videoconference gear and relayed
to that company's Los Angeles office; that would be easier
(no video editing or uploading) but harder (not sure my company
can offer its Amsterdam office) and wouldn't make the presentations
as available to folks who can't travel.
Or we could do live streaming audio or video,
but that's really hard, and I'd rather not try.
More information about the wineconf