[Fedora-ambassadors-list] Be a critique

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Am Dienstag, den 21.02.2006, 19:38 +0100 schrieb Aurelien Bompard:
> > What is the best
> > criticisms that you can put forward on areas that Fedora needs to
> > improve? How do we improve on those?
> 
> My take would be hardware support : 
>  - wireless drivers, too young to be included in the mainline kernel (for 
> example rt2xx)
>  - usb adsl modems, to young or specific to be included in mainline kernel 
> (for example eagle-usb)
>  - all the unofficial drivers out there, which are not in the mainline 
> kernel. (for example webcam drivers, etc...)

Rhetoric: Well, if they are not good enough for the kernel, why should
they be good enough for Fedora users? The problem here IMHO is that
those project first try to write a complete and full featured driver and
then try to merge it with the kernel. That often does not work. Look at
LKML, you'll find enough examples. Someone should tell those project:
"If the USB-Modem driver works basically try to merge it with the
kernel. After that was done start to enhance it. That's better for
everyone."

> If we had more kernel module packages included in core for every possible 
> driver, we'd gain a lot of home users (they can't be in extras if they're 
> needed for network connectivity).

I don't think you'll get them included in Core. But having them in
Extras is better then nothing.

> A kernel package specfile template has been aggreed on recently, but IFAICT 
> it's only for Extras.

The goal was to use the same scheme in Core, too (e.g. for GFS). But
some people want to shove GFS to Extras, too (AFAIK). 

CU
thl