RFC - Downgrade BlueZ to v4.101 in Fedora 20
bnocera at redhat.com
Fri Jan 24 07:31:00 UTC 2014
----- Original Message -----
> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 16:56 -0500, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> > > As a side note, it also needs to be discussed how such a key feature of
> > > the bluetooth stack could go unnoticed through QA, and how to avoid this
> > > from happening again.
> > Indeed. I wondered the same myself.
> I'm somewhat cheered that our product has apparently reached the quality
> level where people consider a Bluetooth audio profile to be a 'key
> feature', but so far as our QA standards are concerned, it ain't.
Somewhat. My experience for the past couple of years has been that I didn't
monitor bluez closely for one release, and then got nastygrams 3 months after
release that a major Bluetooth functionality broke (pairing, obex sending or
receiving of files, HID devices not connecting, etc.).
This was compounded by the fact that there hasn't been a Bluetooth kernel
maintainer in Red Hat for a number of years. Customers of RHEL and users of Fedora
expect Bluetooth to work out of the box, and never regress, but there's
close to zero investment in making sure it doesn't regress or adding the
necessary features (cf. ObexFTP client support, abandoned for the past 3 years).
TLDR; lack of investment in Bluetooth leads to regressions (within the community or Red Hat)
> This didn't really 'pass unnoticed' through QA. I noticed it, and was
> supremely unconcerned. Yes, if you depend on this specific feature it
> sucks, but it's hardly unusual for some specific feature of something or
> other to break between Fedora releases. It's a thing that happens, and
> as I'm on record as arguing in more extensive and generic terms, the
> nature of Fedora as a project would need to change quite a lot before we
> decided we were a project where stuff like this didn't sometimes break.
FWIW, the HFP/HSP support is missing in PulseAudio, not in BlueZ for F20.
/Bastien Nocera - windmill tilter
More information about the devel