LSE conference call

LSE conference call

[John Bradford]

Nobody else is in the conference, has it been cancelled, or am I late?  :-)

John.

Re: LSE conference call

[Cliff White]

> Nobody else is in the conference, has it been cancelled, or am I late?  :-)

You were a bit late. Mr. Irwin didn't show, so it was a very brief call.
cliffw

> 
> John.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

Re: LSE conference call

[William Lee Irwin III]

At some point in the past, John Bradford wrote:
>> Nobody else is in the conference, has it been cancelled, or am I late?  :-)

On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 12:58:42PM -0700, Cliff White wrote:
> You were a bit late. Mr. Irwin didn't show, so it was a very brief call.
> cliffw

Sorry about that, I fell asleep shortly before the call despite
attempts not to.


-- wli

Re: LSE conference call

[John Bradford]

> 
> At some point in the past, John Bradford wrote:
> >> Nobody else is in the conference, has it been cancelled, or am I late?  :-)
> 
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 12:58:42PM -0700, Cliff White wrote:
> > You were a bit late. Mr. Irwin didn't show, so it was a very brief call.
> > cliffw
> 
> Sorry about that, I fell asleep shortly before the call despite
> attempts not to.

Oh well, never mind.  I called at about 18:25 U.K. time, (GMT+1), so I
must have missed you by about 1 nanosecond :-).

John.

Re: LSE conference call

[Hanna Linder]

In light of our speaker sleeping through the meeting and
the fact that kernel hackers tend not to be awake early
in the morning I propose moving the time of the call to
1pm Pacific Time (GMT-0800). 

Originally we chose 9:30am to encourage people in Europe and 
India to attend. However, the time change has not increased 
attendance so I think we should move it to a more reasonable 
time for North American Continental dwellers who are the 
main attendees.

Any comments? Debate? Hate mail?

Send to me or lse-tech@lists.sf.net

Hanna


--On Friday, April 18, 2003 03:08:10 PM -0700 William Lee Irwin III <wli@holomorphy.com> wrote:

> At some point in the past, John Bradford wrote:
>>> Nobody else is in the conference, has it been cancelled, or am I late?  :-)
> 
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2003 at 12:58:42PM -0700, Cliff White wrote:
>> You were a bit late. Mr. Irwin didn't show, so it was a very brief call.
>> cliffw
> 
> Sorry about that, I fell asleep shortly before the call despite
> attempts not to.
> 
> 
> -- wli
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

Re: LSE conference call

[John Bradford]

> In light of our speaker sleeping through the meeting and
> the fact that kernel hackers tend not to be awake early
> in the morning I propose moving the time of the call to
> 1pm Pacific Time (GMT-0800). 

10 PM U.K. time is no problem for me.

> Originally we chose 9:30am to encourage people in Europe and 
> India to attend. However, the time change has not increased 
> attendance so I think we should move it to a more reasonable 
> time for North American Continental dwellers who are the 
> main attendees.
> 
> Any comments? Debate? Hate mail?

Flame war?  :-)

John.

Re: LSE conference call

[jw schultz]

On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 06:49:41PM +0100, John Bradford wrote:
> > In light of our speaker sleeping through the meeting and
> > the fact that kernel hackers tend not to be awake early
> > in the morning I propose moving the time of the call to
> > 1pm Pacific Time (GMT-0800). 
> 
> 10 PM U.K. time is no problem for me.

I think Hanna meant 1:00PM PDT (GMT-0700)  With UK on DST it
is still 8 hours difference.  I think that also puts it
around 6-8AM down under.

> > Originally we chose 9:30am to encourage people in Europe and 
> > India to attend. However, the time change has not increased 
> > attendance so I think we should move it to a more reasonable 
> > time for North American Continental dwellers who are the 
> > main attendees.
> > 
> > Any comments? Debate? Hate mail?
> 
> Flame war?  :-)
> 
> John.
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

-- 
________________________________________________________________
	J.W. Schultz            Pegasystems Technologies
	email address:		jw@pegasys.ws

		Remember Cernan and Schmitt

Re: LSE conference call

[Bill Davidsen]

On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, Hanna Linder wrote:

> 
> In light of our speaker sleeping through the meeting and
> the fact that kernel hackers tend not to be awake early
> in the morning I propose moving the time of the call to
> 1pm Pacific Time (GMT-0800). 
> 
> Originally we chose 9:30am to encourage people in Europe and 
> India to attend. However, the time change has not increased 
> attendance so I think we should move it to a more reasonable 
> time for North American Continental dwellers who are the 
> main attendees.
> 
> Any comments? Debate? Hate mail?

Must have been really short, I missed it coming in a tad late. In any
case, NY is nicely in the middle between CA and Europe, so any time good
on the ends will be fine here.


On Tue, 22 Apr 2003, jw schultz wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 06:49:41PM +0100, John Bradford wrote:
> > > In light of our speaker sleeping through the meeting and
> > > the fact that kernel hackers tend not to be awake early
> > > in the morning I propose moving the time of the call to
> > > 1pm Pacific Time (GMT-0800). 
> > 
> > 10 PM U.K. time is no problem for me.
> 
> I think Hanna meant 1:00PM PDT (GMT-0700)  With UK on DST it
> is still 8 hours difference.  I think that also puts it
> around 6-8AM down under.

Please just give time in GMT and let us work it out! Between time zones
and daylight savings it's more confusing than useful.

Last week I went to Arizona from New York. It went like this: Sunday
morning 1hr forward for DST. Sunday later, 2hr back for central timezone. 
Sunday later 1hr more back, Arizona doesn't do DST, except... Monday, 1hr
forward again, the Navaho nation in AZ does do DST. At that point I set my
watch to GMT and told local time by the sun! Oh well, lots of brewpubs,
it's always time for a beer. 

-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.

Re: LSE conference call

[John Bradford]

> Last week I went to Arizona from New York. It went like this: Sunday
> morning 1hr forward for DST. Sunday later, 2hr back for central timezone. 
> Sunday later 1hr more back, Arizona doesn't do DST, except... Monday, 1hr
> forward again, the Navaho nation in AZ does do DST. At that point I set my
> watch to GMT and told local time by the sun! Oh well, lots of brewpubs,
> it's always time for a beer. 

Ah, but assuming that you had a compass to calculate the local time
offset, (ignoring DST), anyway, you could have used that to calculate
the _local_ time without looking at your watch at all ;-).  However,
you wouldn't be able to calculate the timezone you were in.

John.

Re: LSE conference call

[Scott Robert Ladd]

John Bradford wrote:
> Ah, but assuming that you had a compass to calculate the local time
> offset, (ignoring DST), anyway, you could have used that to calculate
> the _local_ time without looking at your watch at all ;-).  However,
> you wouldn't be able to calculate the timezone you were in.

Ah, but if you had a GPS system available, and a database of time zone 
boundaries, you could adjust on-the-fly for different jurisdictions. 
I've dones somethign of the sort recently for a client; the main problem 
lies in the accuracy (and size) of the database. Indiana, for example, 
presents unique challenges, with its patchwork implementation of DST...

-- 
Scott Robert Ladd
Coyote Gulch Productions (http://www.coyotegulch.com)

Re: LSE conference call

[Eric W. Biederman]

Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com> writes:

> John Bradford wrote:
> > Ah, but assuming that you had a compass to calculate the local time
> > offset, (ignoring DST), anyway, you could have used that to calculate
> > the _local_ time without looking at your watch at all ;-).  However,
> > you wouldn't be able to calculate the timezone you were in.
> 
> Ah, but if you had a GPS system available, and a database of time zone
> boundaries, you could adjust on-the-fly for different jurisdictions. I've dones
> somethign of the sort recently for a client; the main problem lies in the
> accuracy (and size) of the database. Indiana, for example, presents unique
> challenges, with its patchwork implementation of DST...

Indiana doesn't do DST.  But it is true that people on the edges of the state
like to know what time it is for their neighbors across the border.  

I suspect the border case is at least slightly true for other places right
on the border between timezones, as well.    Though I can't think of any other
examples right now.

Eric

Re: LSE conference call

[H. Peter Anvin]

Followup to:  <m1ade4cdxl.fsf@frodo.biederman.org>
By author:    ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Scott Robert Ladd <coyote@coyotegulch.com> writes:
> 
> > John Bradford wrote:
> > > Ah, but assuming that you had a compass to calculate the local time
> > > offset, (ignoring DST), anyway, you could have used that to calculate
> > > the _local_ time without looking at your watch at all ;-).  However,
> > > you wouldn't be able to calculate the timezone you were in.
> > 
> > Ah, but if you had a GPS system available, and a database of time zone
> > boundaries, you could adjust on-the-fly for different jurisdictions. I've dones
> > somethign of the sort recently for a client; the main problem lies in the
> > accuracy (and size) of the database. Indiana, for example, presents unique
> > challenges, with its patchwork implementation of DST...
> 
> Indiana doesn't do DST.  But it is true that people on the edges of the state
> like to know what time it is for their neighbors across the border.  
> 

Part of Indiana does DST, part of it doesn't.  In particular, the
parts of Indiana is in the CT timezone (Gary area) *does* do DST.

	-hpa

-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
Architectures needed: ia64 m68k mips64 ppc ppc64 s390 s390x sh v850 x86-64