2016-11-14 22:26 GMT+01:00 Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > On Mon, Nov 14, 2016 at 4:13 PM, Andreas Tunek <andreas.tunek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 2016-11-14 14:01 GMT+01:00 Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx>: >>> On 11/13/2016 01:46 PM, Ms Sanchez wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On 11/11/16 14:33, Stephen Gallagher wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Just to address this specifically, I am referring to Apple's penchant for >>>>> stuffing their machines with hardware from vendors that don't play well with >>>>> open-source (for example, switching to wifi-only devices and shipping Broadcom >>>>> chipsets with no open-source drivers). Then also playing games with their >>>>> bootloader system so that we have to go through lots of hoops to trick it into >>>>> letting us install. >>>>> >>>>> Apple's entire business model is predicated on the idea that they know best and >>>>> you should only ever run software on their devices that they have provided to >>>>> you... at a substantial percentage for themselves. They do whatever they can at >>>>> a technical level to enable this. >>>>> >>>>> (Note: I'm not attempting to vilify Apple here. Their devices are usually >>>>> sturdy, well-constructed and certainly attractive. They are however a company >>>>> trying to make money and they have a certain business model that is largely >>>>> dependent on *not* enabling us.) >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Apple's business model is based on selling you a golden cage. They are entitled >>>> to do that and we are entitled to dislike it. >>> >>> Certainly. My point is that I don't feel that we are necessarily responsible for >>> working around their antagonism either. Yes, it would be nice if Fedora >>> supported all hardware ever made. But the simple truth is that Apple tries very >>> hard to make it *not* work. They have a vested interest in that. >>> >>> So I assert that while support for Apple hardware is desirable, I don't believe >>> that the lack of it should prevent us from shipping Fedora for all the other >>> hardware that we do support. >>> >>> >> >> If you stop supporting certain hardware right before release due to a >> regression bug you set a very troublesome precedent. It not only means >> that the work people did developing and testing the features where >> wasted, it also means that Fedora can toss out any feature at any time >> if there is a bug. And that is not a very stable OS to use and >> contribute to. > > If the features were developed and tested during the creation of the > release, why would they fail criteria at the last minute? You are > making a good argument to not throw away something because "people > don't like it", but in the context of this discussion there seems to > be a distinct lack of resources actually doing the work. It may be > perfectly justifiable to do a release anyway under that premise. > AFAIK, you have been able to install Fedora on Intel Macs since 2008 (that was when I first tried). To not be able to install Fedora on (Intel) Macs is a regression. > Also, there is a large difference between shipping a release that > works on a majority of hardware with the goal of fixing it where it > doesn't after, and "stop supporting certain hardware". > How do you fix it if you can't install the release? Do you make a new release with all the testing again (to make sure you do not have other regression bugs)? > Lastly, support is a very loaded word, particularly in the context of > a community driven project. We actually do not have an x86 equivalent > of the ARM supported-boards list, so it's completely random as to what > laptops and desktops are tested and prioritized. That might be > something to focus on going forward. It has been in the release critera that you should be able to install on macs and it has worked for a very long time. If you are going to remove that support you should really let people know in advance (not a week before release). Also, most hardware support is handled by Linux which has a much bigger community than Fedora. But this issue seems to be in Anaconda which is only used by Fedora (and derivatives?). Other OS installers does not seem to have this problem (AFAIK). /Andreas > > josh > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
