On Sunday 04 January 2004 20:43, William Anderson wrote:
[snip]
Special Interest Group is probably a better term :)
agreed
Install Days and
similar events are definitely a good idea, but organising them can be a
bitch. Perhaps linking with (semi-)professional LAN party organisers would
Willie wrote:
On Sunday 04 January 2004 20:43, William Anderson wrote:
[snip]
Special Interest Group is probably a better term :)
agreed
Install Days and
similar events are definitely a good idea, but organising them can be a
bitch. Perhaps linking with (semi-)professional LAN party
On Saturday 03 January 2004 02:09, Rob Lazzurs wrote:
snip
Just IMHO, however I think you only have to have a look at the LUG
through in Edinbugger to find out why this is a bad idea. Sorry for
coming into this thread so late, I have been stuck on a windows machine
and I have just finally
Willie wrote:
[snip]
If we do have a committee, it will take some thick-skinned and determined folk
on that committee to keep it running right. Organising geeks is like herding
cats (apologies to whoever I stole that line off). We all think we are bright
enough to think we know better and we
On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 23:27, ptb wrote:
Don't get me wrong, SLUG has been fine in terms of individual
members' achievements and help given but what has it done in
say the last six months except survive?
Pat
It's easy to sit and heckle from the sidelines, isn't it? It seems it's
a lot
On Sunday 14 December 2003 21:14, Ian Ruffell wrote:
Don't get me wrong, SLUG has been fine in terms of individual
members' achievements and help given but what has it done in
say the last six months except survive?
Don't knock the personal contacts, help given and expertise shared. In my
Just a couple of follow-ups.
On the issue of PDAs, I believe MSPs get nice new shiny, officially-sanctioned
Palms these days.
Colin (Speirs) talked of the difficulties of short-term success. Sure - and
that's true of so many places. BUT, frustrating as it is (and believe me I
KNOW how
On Saturday 13 December 2003 15:28, ed wrote:
I have no fondness for the Tories either. I only know she is a Psion
user because I saw her use on on the Glasgow-Edinburgh train and since I
also used a Psion, a 3a compred to her Psion5, I was aware of the
difficulties Psion using politicos
Colin McKinnon wrote:
The three document management systems I've come across (apologies if
I've
overlooked someone here Julian) are all intensively Microsoft based.
The serious contenders tend to run on a variety of platforms, i.e.
Documentum ($500k+):
Platforms Supported
Windows NT Server 4.0
On Saturday 13 December 2003 14:13, Martin Habets wrote:
snip
And with all the political talk I think we have found a perfect
raison d'etre for the Scottish LUG (versus the Glasgow LUG).
With SLUG we can have one interface to all of of Scottish politics,
and we can all contact our local MSPs.
Hallo all : -
As an activity/interest group that can't even agree on having
any need for a customarily-adequate para-bureaucratic committee
component, SLUG would maybe feel out of place dealing with
politicians who actually want to govern and are willing to face
up to trying to do it. So maybe
On Saturday 13 December 2003 23:27, ptb wrote:
Hallo all : -
As an activity/interest group that can't even agree on having
any need for a customarily-adequate para-bureaucratic committee
component, SLUG would maybe feel out of place dealing with
politicians who actually want to govern and
Title: RE: [Scottish] The Future of the LUG
Just for clarification: it's more a case of persuading folk
like the
Scottish
Executive and the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body to
shift off MS; not to
mention encouraging similar moves in the public sector at
large. Pat talks
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 20:10, Ian Ruffell wrote:
Just for clarification: it's more a case of persuading folk like the Scottish
Executive and the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body to shift off MS; not to
mention encouraging similar moves in the public sector at large. Pat talks
about this
On Thursday 11 December 2003 10:03, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 20:10, Ian Ruffell wrote:
Just for clarification: it's more a case of persuading folk like the
Scottish Executive and the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body to shift
off MS; not to mention encouraging similar
TEST Sending to both Willie and list by means of auto reply
Tony D
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Willie
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On Thursday 11 December 2003 10:03, Gordon JC Pearce wrote:
On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 20:10, Ian Ruffell wrote:
Did he now? I never got that msg which is kinda
On Thursday 11 December 2003 10:16 pm, ed wrote:
As an IT person working for the Scottish Executive I obviously can't say
anything about this but if an MSP were to ask the Executive when the
last time they had an OS refresh, what OS it was and what consideration
was given to Linux I do not
It's not so much getting politicians away from using Microsoft's
products (although it could save a substantial amount) as getting them
away from closed, secret, non-free document formats.
Yeah, I don't dispute that open formats are a large issue. But a) saving
money is not to be sniffed
William Anderson wrote:
Colin McKinnon wrote:
On Tuesday 09 Dec 2003 14:40, William Anderson wrote:
Is it time perhaps to rename ourselves the Glasgow LUG? Also, the
Scottish LUG could be reused as an umbrella organisation, perhaps
uniting
the other LUGs in Scotland to form a larger community
On Wednesday 10 December 2003 12:01 pm, Willie wrote:
Possibly it may evolve into 2 talks per month, one for beginners and one
more advanced.
Probably a good idea not to get trapped into a binary newbie/advanced (I know
that's not quite what you're saying) - maybe a better way of looking at it
On Tuesday 09 Dec 2003 14:40, William Anderson wrote:
Is it time perhaps to rename ourselves the Glasgow LUG? Also, the Scottish
LUG could be reused as an umbrella organisation, perhaps uniting the other
LUGs in Scotland to form a larger community ... This could be an excellent
way of
On Tuesday 09 December 2003 3:58 pm, Ben Thorp wrote:
Feb - Debate - will Linux be ready for the desktop in 2004
bits snipped
Tony has advised that he doesn't think that a debate is a good idea, so we
can change that one.
I don't know about a debate as such, but it would be handy to have a
Ian Ruffell wrote:
(e.g. my major concern still is the Access replacement - both Rekall and
Kexio are getting there, perhaps) but also to do with institutions and
processes.
Ian,
What's Kexio? I'm guessing it's a tyop since google only returns 9
results, none of which seem relevant or maybe
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 09 December 2003 19:40, Allan Whiteford wrote:
Ian Ruffell wrote:
(e.g. my major concern still is the Access replacement - both Rekall and
Kexio are getting there, perhaps) but also to do with institutions and
processes.
Ian,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 09 December 2003 19:03, Phil Deane wrote:
On Tuesday 09 Dec 2003 14:40, William Anderson wrote:
Is it time perhaps to rename ourselves the Glasgow LUG? Also, the
Scottish
LUG could be reused as an umbrella organisation, perhaps
On Tuesday 09 December 2003 9:42 pm, Kyle Gordon wrote:
I believe he was meaning Kexi, from http://www.koffice.org/kexi/
Yes, ahem, sorry. My bad.
(There's a [non-free] Latin grammar program called Flexio which is on my mind
at the moment for various reasons: one of my copious-free-time
Ben Thorp wrote:
Unfortunately I don't have access to IRC from work, and I'm not always free
in the evening :o( However, I will try and attend more.
I posted a topic with some suggestions for talks/topics for the next 6
months on the webpage. It went something like this:
Jan - Bring
27 matches
Mail list logo
