On Fri, 1 May 2009, Marcus Moeller wrote: > Dear Dag, > >> I am amazed by the usefulness of the CentOS LiveCD and I would like to >> discuss the scope of the project. Some of the recommendations I made >> go against the original idea of LiveCD project. >> >> But my (outside) stance on the LiveCD is that it should give the best >> achievable experience possible for people when trying CentOS. To me that >> includes adding drivers that are available in other repositories (which >> are missing from upstream, including wireless firmware, etc...) >> >> I do agree that as soon as we leave the deliver-what-upstream-has path, we >> may open a can of worms (do we also want to fix known bugs ? replace >> upstream software ? legality ?), so we have to decide what is desirable, >> what is possible and where the project's effort ends. > > I don't think that there is a need to divide from upstream atm. and am > not really willed to break compatibility for features. > > Concerning the Live-CD, I would suggest to offer a stable version that > reflects the CentOS release with all dis-advantages it may have (not > installable, e.g.) So it becomes effectively useless for everyone with a netbook/laptop and needs wireless ? I cannot use the LiveCD unless I somehow transfer the firmware (or remake the LiveCD), you loose users, hurt the project. Upstream doesn't have a LiveCD, so I don't see a good point in maintaining the same hardware support in that respect. It only hurts the LiveCD effort. (Same for additional drivers for netbooks/laptops/desktops) What's even more, upstream does have wireless firmware in their addon repository, so in effect we are not offering the same as they are offering to customers. -- -- dag wieers, dag at centos.org, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]