Re: making progress with ACPI was: ACPI small patch update (20021024)

[J <acpi-bdq14YP6qtSeVB85EesmETSf8X3wrgjD@public.gmane.org>]

On Tue, 29 Oct 2002 03:20, Grover, Andrew wrote:
> The real problem is there need to be more people fixing bugs. If you see a
> bug on your hardware, *you* are in the best spot to fix it. That is the
> only way this is going to work, long-term. You are asking for both a
> greater focus on the project's infrastructure, *and* more bug fixing, and
> that is only going to happen if people who have not previously pitched in,
> start doing so.
>
>
> It has been a rough road sometimes, but we (Intel) have tried to encourage
> community involvement as much as possible. But, I look over at the Linux
> USB list and see a much greater level of community contribution. We have
> some, but we need MORE. Without that involvement, we will get there with
> ACPI -- it will just take longer.
>
>
> Let's talk about ways we can increase participation in Linux development.
> If people would feel freer to contribute if there was no official
> maintainer (or a different, non-Intel one) then that is an option.
> (Volunteers?) If there is any other roadblock to involvement, let's see if
> we can't eliminate it.


I don't think I've posted to this list yet.

I'll say right now it would be easier to hold a discussion if the list was set 
for replies to go to the list - I'm sure lots of mail gets misdirected with 
the current settings.

Don't reply to my address, mail to it will bounce. It's an antispam measure, 
I'm sure you will all understand.

I don't have the skills to _fix_ bugs, but I like to think I'm quite good at 
_spotting_ them. It seems to me that spotting bugs and reporting them is a 
useful skill too often overlooked by developers.

I think part of the problem you have with not enough developers is the low 
profile you keep. A lot of people, especially before USB was integrated, had 
to fight to get their USB devices working. I am one of those who was running 
2.3 kernels just for that reason.

Most people, I think, don't know what ACPI can do for them. I don't, and I 
have installed acpid, built kernels supporting it, and configured systems so 
I can shut them down by pressing the power button.

That's a cool feature, and ideal for those why want their servers to run a few 
hours a day and don't want keyboards or monitors on them.

If some people here actually promote ACPI in other fora (such as Red Hat's 
Psyche list) and seek people to help with development, documentation 
(documentation? No problems with the documentation, there is none!), then I'm 
sure you will get some volunteers.

If you people at Intel think that Intel's ownership of the project is a 
problem, get non-Intel email addresses. I could host a couple of those at 
Computer Datasafe. I'm sure others better-known to you could do so too.

See if you can get someone from AMD to take part - and USE an AMD email 
address.

I personally think it's good to see Intel folk here, it shows Intel comittment 
to the effort.

Ask Steve Best at IBM whether he found his management of the JFS project a 
problem.

Shameem Akhter, Forrest Taylor, and Michael Blandford are all Intel people on 
various lists at Red Hat. I presume they'd be happy to tell others about your 
need.

Maybe a bit of talking with RH will get acpid included and ACPI enabled in RH 
kernels.




-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf