[CREATE] LGM2011 Launch Timings + pledgie drive

[Femke Snelting]

> On 02/12/2011 06:32 PM, Gregory Pittman wrote:
>> On 02/12/2011 06:45 AM, Femke Snelting wrote:
>>>
>>> Not sure about needing less talks, but in favour of having a few
>>> well-prepared, moderated panels :-)
>>
>> +1
>> I would emphasize _well-prepared_. Better to have only one or just a
>> few as long as they can be "guaranteed" (disclaimer: nothing can be
>> guaranteed) to be top-notch. Keep the audience in mind.
>>
> I think "keeping the audience in mind" means if we can only come up with
> one or two topics worthy of panel discussion, we don't set up multiple
> panels just 'cause we can....  So are there concepts we can nail down?
> If so, I'd suggest we want to get those in order *before* opening up the
> call for individual submissions....

For a 2nd panel I propose we discuss artist-developer collaborations: what drives people with different interests in the same Libre Graphics software, to productively work together?

It relates to the recent post by Alexandre Prokoudine: Contributing to free software projects (a must-read: "How can I help a free software project, if I don’t code" http://prokoudine.info/blog/2011/02/contributing-to-free-software-projects) and also to LGM itself (Nathan Willis in response to LGM 2010: "LGM has always placed more of an emphasis on connecting users and developers than other open source conferences, but this year the difference that emphasis made was more noticeable. It was not perfect; several artists and designers mentioned informally that they would liked to have had more direct discussions with the development teams about the future of the projects, but did not find the opportunity." http://lwn.net/Articles/390572).

Maybe Mushon Zer Aviv could be someone to invite to the table... He is a 'designer, an educator and a media activist based in NY & Tel Aviv' and has written and lectured extensively about Open Source Design. I don't always agree but think his perspective is interesting for LGM ("Successful open-source projects have always benefited from a mix of the two approaches, a combination of openness and leadership. Finding a similarly nuanced approach in other fields is required if we ever hope to extend the open-source model beyond code." http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2010/09/01/the-case-for-open-source-design-can-design-by-committee-work -- might help us understand why the recent Ubuntu re-design was outsourced to a non-libre agency using proprietary tools?).

Also we need an occasion to talk about why and how Scribus-developers are currently re-coding the properties panel in order to facilitate contributions by new types of contributors, and maybe why designers happy to contribute to F/LOSS, don't like contests ;-)

Femke


P.S.: ginger proposed a panel on "Exchanging workflows between F/LOSS and artists". It's obviously linked (Mushon might actually be better suited for that) so we need to figure out if there is not too much overlap and subsequently merge or re-articulate.