On Tuesday, 25 March 2008 at 19:37, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 09:08:56AM -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 7:56 AM, Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > This "well my system is ok, screw everyone else" approach is what I find > > > > so fundamentally broken in this idea. Especially as the people advocating > > > > for this aren't those who get to deal with the fallout when users start > > > > filing bugs. > > > > > > > > > > I believe the stated goal is to package things in such a way that Alexandre > > > can then propose a separate spin that is libre by his definition. but has > > > the potential to carry the Fedora marks. > > > > And then when people download that spin, and find their computer doesn't boot, > > who gets the bug reports ? > > > > I would figure they would need to go to that spin's SIG/Committee. And > the opening anaconda should clearly say that: > > Attempting to boot libre kernel. This will only work on hardware that > is completely open and documented. All other hardware will be > problematic. Contact kernel-libre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx for more messages, > and open bugs under FEDORA-LIBRE in bugzilla.fedorahosted.org. Most people won't bother to read this or will forget this 5 minutes into the installation process. Regards, R. -- Fedora contributor http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DominikMierzejewski Livna contributor http://rpm.livna.org MPlayer developer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
