Talk:Historical:Meetings

From GTALUG

• I will be freely editing every meeting for structure, function and beauty. Please don't be afraid of this, although it is revisionistic it isn't a bad thing. "Pure" archives of announcements are still kept in the mailing list archives. -- Sy / ^(talk)

problems accessing old meetings (old site)

I was going to start importing in the old meeting info, but recent changes mean that I currently am unable to get the pages from the server, if they still are there. I've tried both the original URLs and with /old-tlug/ inserted at the appropriate location and only get 404s (original URLs) and errors that result in no meeting information being returned.

Is the original information still available, or am I going to have to spend more time with the Wayback Machine and my incomplete listings that I gathered earlier? --Seneca 20:01, 6 May 2005 (EDT)

• The old info should be somewhere.. and it should be made accessible on the old site still. I'll ask around. -- Sy / ^(talk) 02:29, 8 May 2005 (EDT)

• Until it is, I'll grab the info from various online archives.

--Seneca 07:51, 8 May 2005 (EDT)

• Ugh, I don't like the idea of going to archives.. it feels messy to me, and I hate to overwork you. Who do we blame for taking down the old site? -- Sy / ^(talk) 19:15, 13 May 2005 (EDT)

• Where do you think I got the pre-2002 meeting info from? I spent the past few days in archives and archives and caches of archives, getting stuff such as a couple c.o.l.a postings that aren't on google and 2000-2002 meetings. I got most of the 2003-2004 meetings from gmane, and filled in the last bit after Drew restored the oldsite meeting listings (which only go back to 2003). --Seneca 20:47, 13 May 2005 (EDT)

• Ouch.. ok, so you did a recovery of the old website's archives from back to 2003 at least. I suppose there isn't much choice but to do the web archive archeology. =( -- Sy / ^(talk) 13:00, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

• The fun part is that I have yet to be able to find a pre-2000 mailing list archive (hence my post requesting one). It's entirely possible that entire chunks of GTALUG history will have to be reconstructed through indirect sources such as the media, blogs, and other LUGs' archives and the memories of longtime GTALUG members. --Seneca 20:39, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

• Just found a very partial archive of 1999 available through archive.org. I know it has parts of May-July. Bleh, I'm going to have nightmares about "Path Index Error"s for weeks. --Seneca 23:17, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

A table?

This entire thing could be put in tables, to align the date, the speaker(s) and the description nicely. Comments? -- Sy / ^(talk) 19:15, 13 May 2005 (EDT)

Old NewTLUG meetings?

In my travels I've come across information about NewTLUG meetings prior to the start of their current past meeting archives. Anywhere in specific that I should do with/put them? --Seneca 12:02, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

• This is something I'm fairly confused about.. NewTLUG is a good group of people, and it appears to me that there is significant overlap between GTALUG and NewTLUG. I have also seen a struggle for "what are we about" with both groups.

So the question is.. aside from sharing some users, what relationship do the two groups have? I vote to not worry about archiving their material in as much as we don't worry about any other group in that way.

However, some sort of long-term relationship needs to be made between the various linux and free software groups in the area. Maybe a good start to that end would be to welcome NewTLUG material. One centralized wiki for the various groups in the area which we're aligned to would be a very significant deal. I'll post something up on the mailing list on this topic. -- Sy / ^(talk) 13:00, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

• From what I've seen, NewTLUG originated as part of the old TLUG (GTALUG was a different group back then). I don't have all the details, as their formation occurred before any of the detailed archives currently available to me, but it appears to have started as the new users SIG for TLUG (with some politics also involved). NewTLUG only got their own non-TLUG mailing list in October 2002 (and quite the flames flew in the brief time preceeding that list's creation). NewTLUG and our GTALUG do share history, and past mailing lists and meetings pages, which is how I ended up with the question of what to do with all the meetings of theirs that I encounter. --Seneca 18:42, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

Let's see if I understand this:

• TLUG formed.
• Members of TLUG formed GTALUG and the new group continued in parallel.
  • They shared members.
• At some point the membership of GTALUG must have been re-absorbed into TLUG.
  • I understand that there was a great decline in TLUG activity at one point. Perhaps it is then that TLUG and GTALUG functionally merged.
• NewTLUG formed as some sort of fork / parallel group in order to support another style of meeting
• NewTLUG now continues as its own entity.
  • GTALUG and NewTLUG share some members.
  • We share mailing list resources.
• Recently, the TLUG/GTALUG combined usergroup has asserted itself in the form of execs and senior members moving towards a name change.

If it were my call (and it's not, it's yours) I'd say not to put NewTLUG meeting notes up here. The problem is that it seems that NewTLUG was developed quite parallel to TLUG, sharing members and resources and whatnot. Meetings during this period would be good to note, but once NewTLUG became its own identity (own mailing list? own meeting place?) then I'd recommend bookmarking such references for later use. -- Sy / ^(talk) 19:16, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

Not quite, but I didn't go through the chronology all that well in my previous comment. Closer to:

• TLUG formed (1994)
• NewTLUG, a SIG of TLUG formed (pre-2000)
  • They hold separate meetings to the main TLUG, in separate locations
  • Their webpage is on TLUG's site with separate meeting listings
• TLUG's website is redone (June-July 2002)
  • Both TLUG and NewTLUG meetings are on the same page
• Some subscribers were removed from the TLUG mailing list, including Thamer Al-Harbash (July 2002)
• A non-TLUG GTALUG mailing list is formed by a TLUG member (September 2002)
• Thamer returns to the mailing list (October 2002)
  • The flamefest of October 2002 results
  • People start crying out for a new mailing list for NewTLUG (October 2002)
  • NewTLUG forms their own list, albeit low traffic at the beginning (October 2002)
• NewTLUG, while retaining TLUG's new webpage style, gets its own webpage (late-2002)
• The non-TLUG GTALUG mailing list shuts down (post-2002)
• TLUG changes its name to GTALUG (2005)

This clear anything up? And while not bookmarks, I have these URLs (and more) categorised in a text document waiting for if I need them. So, when would you say NewTLUG became its own identity? --Seneca 20:21, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

• Yes, that helps a lot. I'd say that NewTLUG was its own identity from the very beginning, even though the two were sharing the same hosting, the separate meetingplace is, in my mind, a rigid distinction between the two groups. The fact that they now maintain their own mailing list, hosting and executive membership is an indication that NewTLUG wishes to be its own entity. Based on this I'd say to not add their meetings and keep NewTLUG content separate out of politeness .. so they can maintain their identity (there's a better word for this.. political solidarity.. or something). However, a historical document including such meeting notes, examining the relationship between the two groups would be of interest. -- Sy / ^(talk) 20:39, 14 May 2005 (EDT)

• Fine by me, but a key part of that document currently lacks info sources at this point in time. NewTLUG was formed before the mailing list archives I currently have access to start. --Seneca 20:58, 14 May 2005 (EDT)