Events FAD remote participation infrastructure

[Yaakov Nemoy]

2010/1/11 Mel Chua <mel at redhat.com>:
>> Since this FAD looks to be about the same size as the one we had in
>> Rheinfelden, i don't think we need any fancy architecture for this.
>> You all tend to work with a higher amount of technology though, than
>> i've seen in EMEA (such as gobby). (We're not backward hicks here,
>> just collaboration works differently here.)
>
> I personally aim for As Little Technology As Possible - no sense in
> having more to set up than we need.

This goes against the Fedora mission. Completely ;). Actually, i agree
in determining exactly what we need and sticking to it, but there's a
part of me that says i want to play around too. For small events it's
a good way to test out a new medium completely to see if the dynamic
works and then seeing how it scales at bigger events.

>> I'm guessing we'll have the following data being passed around:
>>
>> * A live stream of people talking
>> * Documents
>> * Meeting notes
>> * Information pulled out of a browser, etc...
> * Development/packaging of video-related software (possibly)
>
>> It would also be nice to try out new technologies and new media if
>> there are any ideas.
>>
>> For the discussion parts, we can get by on IRC, doing a Fedora Talk
>> stream would be great. I can at least listen in, though i have to do
>> something about a microphone.
>
> We'll have a conference phone in the room we're in (20-person conference
> room, says Max in today's meeting log.)

Can we try a test run of Fedora Talk sometime in the near future? I
want to make sure i can get it configured before hand.

>> I've never worked with gobby before, we can give that a try for
>> documents and meeting notes. We can also use meeting bot for basics
>> like links, action items and so on.
>
> Yep, we should be continuously in #fudcon-planning - I think of IRC as
> our default/fallback communication medium, in case the call drops out,
> gobby doesn't work, etc. I think designating someone in the room at any
> given point in time to serve as "The IRC Bridge" may be a good idea, so
> remote folks know who they can ping to catch someone's attention.

What i meant here is that we can do two things, and simultaneously.
Having a voice stream is optimal because you can pick up exactly what
people are saying. IRC doesn't afford that unfortunately. Not everyone
is going to have access to voice though, so i think someone (or
someones) should be logging everything on IRC, just like the previous
FAD and FUDCon. Having voice is a bonus. Likewise, even if i have
voice, i may not have a microphone so i may post questions to IRC
anyways.

>> Finally, let's try some screen sharing tools. It would be nice to work
>> on a digital platform and see what other people are seeing. It might
>> even be useful inside the conference room too.
>
> Yep - we'll have a projector in our hackroom, so that would be nice to
> try out at some point.

-Yaakov