It would be nice if it were that way, but that's just not the case. ApacheCon is a for profit effort with some of the proceeds going to the foundation (in theory). In other words, the ASF gets money from ApacheCon and does not generally invest any money in ApacheCon. In 2009 I think the foundation did invest some money in marketing (for the anniversary) that also benefitted ApacheCon (since they had a party there for it), but that's the closest thing I'm aware of to what you are describing.
Also consider that the majority of the participants in the OFBiz events have been people who already know about and are already using OFBiz. Even in 2008 with the enormous investments in the conference by OFBiz contributors, much of which was supposed to go into promoting the conference but the PR consulting company messed up that year (which caused them to be replaced), and so even then most of the people attending sessions were presenters at other sessions. Even in the pre-ApacheCon OFBiz Users Conferences there were far more developers and contributors attending than users, and typically the users were people who happened to live close to the conference and who attended to check out what was going on. We need something else to attract end-users and better meet their needs. -David On Apr 2, 2010, at 11:58 AM, Ruth Hoffman wrote: > Hi Ean: > Nice, but I think you might be missing my point. > > ApacheCon is all about telling the world about OFBiz and using the immense > resources available to the Foundation to do that. > > IMHO it isn't really about socializing with the small and (getting smaller by > the hour) OFBiz community. ApacheCon is for our end-users. Or rather, our > potential end-users. This should be the place where we showcase our wares and > not "vacation with a purpose". > > Just my 2 cents. > Regards, > Ruth > > Ean Schuessler wrote: >> I think DebConf is a good example that this can be done and done right. I >> know HP helps out with the expenses of DebConf but part of that is helping >> fly in developers from countries where the currency exchange rates make >> attendance impractically high. We may simply not be able to do that or we >> may come to some agreement about how we would share those expenses for >> speakers with something especially important to contribute. >> >> Given the relatively small size of our community, we have a lot of >> flexibility about where we choose to meet. In my mind, the accommodations >> should be purposefully modest yet interesting and fun. There are lots of >> options like that in all kinds of places. We can think of it as a >> collaboratively planned vacation with a purpose. >> >> David E Jones wrote: >>> I'm not sure if you meant this or not Ruth, but as it was addressed to me I >>> should clarify: I did speak up here, but I am not taking a role in >>> organizing anything as I did in previous years. In other words, I'm not >>> committing to anything on behalf of the project and I'm not trying to >>> recruit speakers and I'm not volunteering to speak or do training either. >>> Quite frankly in the past it has required a lot of time and money and >>> liability with no real benefit. I hope someone profited from those past >>> efforts, perhaps the for-profit organizers and maybe some attendees as >>> well. About that, I don't know. ApacheCon was a mess in '08 because people >>> were paying a lot to attend (both the training and the conference) and yet >>> none of the money (not a penny) went to any of the presenters or trainers. >>> In other words, the presenters and trainers were paying to be there and so >>> were the attendees. This culminated in some fascinating personal attacks >>> from people who attended and who were not satisfied that what they got was >>> worth what they paid for it. >>> >>> Just in case anyone is wondering ApacheCon is not the only one that ended >>> up this way. In another conference I did some pre-conference training and >>> made almost nothing doing it because the conference organizers mixed the >>> funds for the training with the funds for the conference, and so basically >>> I offered training and most of the proceeds went to subsidize the >>> conference. My guess is that this happens a lot with conferences. >>> >>> So, taking that on just so other people can make money? Well, I'd like to >>> say that I learned my lesson and that's why I'm not interested (that would >>> incorrectly make me look experienced and intelligent and somehow remotely >>> good at business dealings), but the fact of the matter is that even if I >>> wanted to I don't have the weeks of time and thousands of dollars to even >>> participate in a bare minimum way. If someone else does, I'm sure many >>> people will benefit from their contributions and they should certainly step >>> up and go for it. >>> >>> Anyway, sorry if any bitterness bled through in this text. I think it's >>> really just human nature that expectations of EVERYONE involved with such >>> things have expectations dramatically inconsistent with reality. >>>
