Re: tested hardware list on wiki?

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Bill Hacker
Date: Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 1:43 pm

justin@shiningsilence.com wrote:


Accurate assesment, but needs a bit of finesse and balance, else
potential adopters will see all negative, no positive - especially
against the claims of {other OS of choice} being ever-so-perfect,
and *so*  'automatic with all hardware'.  A claim seldom true.

While the flames should be banned, we have the quandry over how
to NOT have irrelevant arguments, yet encourage reports of what
has actually been tried and works - or fails to do so.

The d.bugs are, of course, negative - but worse - DragonFlyBSD
is too often blamed for a poor configuration issue, and/or
dodgy hardware - which then (sometimes) also generates
more distraction than proper.

I am on record (in /dev/nul of Matt's MTA if not elesewhere),
as suggesting several of these lists should be read-only to
anyone not an 'accepted' developer.

We can always read them from the archives.

Bill


Bill
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
tested hardware list on wiki?, Bob Bagwill, (Wed Mar 16, 8:08 am)
Re: tested hardware list on wiki?, justin, (Wed Mar 16, 10:50 am)
Re: tested hardware list on wiki?, Bill Hacker, (Wed Mar 16, 1:31 pm)
Re: tested hardware list on wiki?, Bill Hacker, (Wed Mar 16, 1:43 pm)