On Thu, 2 Jun 2005 10:50:49 -0700 Chidananda Jayakeerti <ajchida@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, Nice to meet you. Sorry to be so late responding to your posting, but I've been away from the office for a week. And I lost your original email. And my dog ate my homework. Just kidding. Anyway, I'll make an attempt at answering your question; other members will probably have different ideas than mine. That is OK, I'm just thinking out loud here. > I have been resorting to "googling" for Fedora HCL due to the lack of > such a guide. I have a crude list of hardware list built from > experience. This is in no means a official HCL and has very few > hardware. I understand your interest in having a Fedora HCL, so that when you configure a system you have at least _some_ hope that the result will be functional. However, looking at some of the public comments about past experiences with HCL's are revealing. I do not think that having an HCL will be a good idea for Fedora. Red Hat was able to publish their HCL because one of their business services was to certify that a certain combination of vendor hardware and software worked when RH tested it. They were paid handsomely for this service. Vendors liked the idea, but the next engineering change to either the hardware or the software rendered that particular certification worthless because the entry was actually a tuple: Certification[N] = [Hardware(Model,ECO,Options), Software (Version,patch]] Because of the cost involved, many vendors never re-certified for new versions. The HCL also contained some anecdotal entries, of the "this worked for me" variety. The end result was the HCL rapidly became stale. Translation: big maintenance chore. Also, it was never intended to be authoritative, but that's the way it was used. If someone wanted to install Linux, they would check the HCL and then panic because their particular combination was not listed. In the end, the HCL has languished and gotten only sporadic attention. Fedora now includes an Installation Guide and Release Notes that describe the minimal hardware configuration, in generic terms. Google.com is probably the best solution to this issue; especially given the short development cycle of the Fedora project. > However, looking at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=129784 > I realise i might as well start off an official one. Are there any > writiers understaking such a task? > How do I go about starting one? I could do the SelfIntroduction stuff > (although i'm not too comfortable reveling my residence address to a > mailing list :). We would welcome your contribution to the Docs project. A self-introduction is, rather firmly, the most minimal of membership requirements. We won't come to your house to check your address, but notice the section that asks "Why should we trust you?". I think an address of at least the city? country? continent? world? solar system? galaxy? 'verse? is intended to give folks some idea of whom you are. Wade, is this right? Cheers!
Attachment:
pgpcahIkgh90g.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
