On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 12:48:17PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> > > That's the kind of very simple list that I was hoping to build. But the
> > > list isn't the final goal. The goal is to *fix* issues when we see them,
> > > like it happened for the X8STi-F in Debian 5.04.
> >
> > In that case, are you sure that bugs.debian.org isn't what you are
> > looking for?
>
> That seems like a good idea -- how about if we encouraged willing hardware
> manufacturers to maintain a pseudo package type thing, perhaps per
> device, although it would be good to have some sort of wild-card so that
> one could report a bug against hw-supermicro-mb-X8STi-F, and they could
> resign it to hw-supermicro-nic-e1000 or some such, without us needing
> to do more than let them tell us the contact email for their BTS or the
> person in charge of fixing that device, say.
It seems to be a bit unrealistic to assume that we're going to convince
most hardware manufacturers out there to have maintainers of their own
pseudo package in the Debian BTS. I'd say that it's a nice possibility
to offer, but we should not base hardware support verifications only to
that. At best, we should have both a community driven process like those
mentioned earlier on in this thread and the possibility for hardware
people to jump in and provide direct support. But I don't expect the
latter part to be any significant share of the whole thingie.
Just my 0.02 EUR,
Cheers.
--
Stefano Zacchiroli -o- PhD in Computer Science \ PostDoc @ Univ. Paris 7
zack@{upsilon.cc,pps.jussieu.fr,debian.org} -<>- http://upsilon.cc/zack/
Quando anche i santi ti voltano le spalle, | . |. I've fans everywhere
ti resta John Fante -- V. Capossela .......| ..: |.......... -- C. Adams
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature