Hello Mikko, Mikko Rasa <firstname.lastname@example.org> (21/12/2012): > It should be noted that due to licensing issues, the driver will be > closed source. I should note: lol. > There's also one kernel patch that needs to be applied to Wheezy's > kernel for the driver to function. The patch has been accepted to > the mainline kernel, and my understanding is that it's included in > the 3.7 release. You may ask kernel maintainers whether they want/will consider backporting that patch (if it even makes sense) to 3.2; Ben will probably answer this point, otherwise you can reach kernel maintainers at <email@example.com>. > 1. Is there any possibility of getting the drivers in the initial > Wheezy release? If so, what needs to happen on our end? No. > 2. What about a subsequent update to Wheezy? I wasn't able to find > information on what kinds of changes are permitted. No. What you could try to achieve is getting your packages into unstable; if they are in a good shape, they may migrate to testing once the freeze is lifted. From there, they become candidates for wheezy-backports. More information on: http://backports.debian.org/ > 3. Neither us nor Intel has any Debian developers on our respective > payrolls. What's the best approach for maintaining the package? > Should someone from Intel become a maintainer, or are there some > existing developers or maintainers that can take responsibility of > the package after the initial work is complete? For a regular (meaning FLOSS) X driver you could ask X maintainers (firstname.lastname@example.org), but you should note they are not interested in non-free drivers. You may try your luck by asking maintainers of those blobby/non-free fglrx or nvidia drivers. Mraw, KiBi.
Description: Digital signature