Skip to main content

How To Consider Chicago in February

Brett Cannon is considering an import tutorial for PyCon '08, focusing on his new work in the area. I've caught word here and there about talks people are working on, and even had a suggestion to make a talk proposal myself, which is silly. I haven't a clue what I would be able to talk about. I sure would love to listen, and watch, and chat with everyone else. I'm really wondering how likely it is that I could make PyCon '08 the one I am finally able to attend.

For Work This Means...

I have a pretty flexable schedule at work and the boss is a great guy. (No, Van, I am not just saying that because I know you read my blog.) Still, I have no idea what prospects I would have for taking the time to attend PyCon, but I'll deal with that when I decide for sure that I want to try to go. Well, I know I want to go, but I have to make sure that I personally can go, before I figure out if I can professionally go.

For Family This Means...

Either Heather will want to come along with me to the cold of Chicago in February or she has to stay home and take care of Caelan all by herself for a few days. Of course, he'll be almost two by then and gets easier to take care of every day. I wouldn't mind them coming along, but what would they do with all the time that I'm at the convention? I suspect they would find something to occupy those days for them aside, like visiting one of her friends or something else that would take them away from the house while I'm gone.

Comments

Doug Napoleone said…
You might be a bit early for the tutorial :-)

The tutorial day is Thursday March 13.

PyCon 2008
Art said…
With the recent weather in Chicago, February might not be all that bad.

Then again, considering our track record, you might want to bring a coat and hat.

Popular posts from this blog

CARDIAC: The Cardboard Computer

I am just so excited about this.


CARDIAC. The Cardboard Computer. How cool is that? This piece of history is amazing and better than that: it is extremely accessible. This fantastic design was built in 1969 by David Hagelbarger at Bell Labs to explain what computers were to those who would otherwise have no exposure to them. Miraculously, the CARDIAC (CARDboard Interactive Aid to Computation) was able to actually function as a slow and rudimentary computer. 
One of the most fascinating aspects of this gem is that at the time of its publication the scope it was able to demonstrate was actually useful in explaining what a computer was. Could you imagine trying to explain computers today with anything close to the CARDIAC?

It had 100 memory locations and only ten instructions. The memory held signed 3-digit numbers (-999 through 999) and instructions could be encoded such that the first digit was the instruction and the second two digits were the address of memory to operate on. The only re…

Interrupting Coders Isn’t So Bad

Here’s a hot take: disrupting coders isn’t all that bad.

Some disruptions are certainly bad but they usually aren’t. The coder community has overblown the impact. A disruption can be a good thing. How harmful disruption might be a symptom of other problems.

There are different kinds of disruptions. They are caused by other coders on your team, managers and other non-coders, or meetings throughout the day.

The easiest example to debunk is a question from a fellow developer. Imagine someone walks over to your desk or they ping you on Slack, because they have “one quick question.” Do you get annoyed at the interruption when you were in the middle of something important? You help out your teammate quickly and get back to work, trying to pick up where you left off. That’s a kind of interruption we complain about frequently, but I’m not convinced this is all that bad.

You are being disrupted but your team, of which you are only one member of the whole unit, is working smoothly. You unstuck …

How To Care If BSD, MIT, or GPL Licenses Are Used

The two recent posts about some individuals' choice of GPL versus others' preference for BSD and MIT style licensing has caused a lot of debate and response. I've seen everything as an interesting combination of very important topics being taken far too seriously and far too personally. All involved need to take a few steps back.

For the uninitiated and as a clarifier for the initiated, we're dealing with (basically) three categories of licensing when someone releases software (and/or its code):
Closed Source. Easiest to explain, because you just get nothing.GPL. If you get the software, you get the source code, you get to change it, and anything you combine it with must be under the same terms.MIT and BSD. If you get the software, you might get the source code, you get to change it, and you have no obligations about anything else you combine it with.The situation gets stickier when we look at those combinations and the transitions between them.

Use GPL code with Closed S…