Hi, sajolida: > intrigeri: >> sajolida: >>> - Does it make sense to link to Redmine tickets? For example, #11095 for >>> Radeon HD was closed because we had nothing else to do but the problem >>> still exist. >> >>> Is it worth making this information visible to users? >> >> Only if the ticket is still open i.e. we think we can do something >> about it: then the user can "Watch" the ticket and learn about new >> experimental ISOs they can test etc.
> If we want to only link to open tickets and not closed ones then this > information will likely get quickly outdated. I'm afraid that linking to > closed tickets (by lack of maintenance) might lead to serious confusion > as it could either mean that the problem is solved or that the problem > cannot be solved... I'm not sure: in many cases, we simultaneously decide to drop the ball on fixing the hardware support issue ourselves and to document the known issue (and workaround if there's a known one), and then we know that the ticket will be closed once the known issue is documented ⇒ the known issue should avoid linking to the ticket. So the only situation when this info will get outdated is when we decide to document a known issue strictly before we drop the ball on tracking/fixing the actual problem ourselves, and thus track the doc writing and the hardware support issue on different tickets. I think we're doing this less and less and with my FT hat on, I plan to keep doing it less and less: researching graphics hardware support issues is a huge time sucker and most of the time we don't get anything out of it other than what the initial hour of research (that leads to documenting a workaround or the lack thereof) already gives us. >>> - Is the "(rev XXX)" part of the graphics card description relevant? >> >> It's relevant: different hardware revisions of the same commercial >> name may behave differently. >> >>> If so I'll have to talk about "name, ID, and revision" instead of only >>> "name and ID". >> >> It depends of what you call the name. I think the name includes the >> revision and cards with different revisions should have different PCI >> IDs. But I'm not an expert at this and I did not check. Should I? >> >> Anyway, your question seems to be about "Mention in your email […] >> [the] name and ID of your graphics cards". In this context, I believe >> the name will include the revision (and if it does not, then I don't >> know how the user would find this info to report it to us, so well). > The output of `lspci -nn` is structured like this: > $VENDOR_NAME $PRODUCT_NAME [$VENDOR_ID:$PRODUCT_ID] (rev $REV) > So far, I've called in my documentation: > - "name" → $VENDOR_NAME $PRODUCT_NAME > - "id" → [$VENDOR_ID:$PRODUCT_ID] > The "revision" comes after the "id" in the output so I would have to > name it explicitly as it's not side-by-side with what I'm calling "name" > so far. OK. > But I'll improve my draft and ask you to review it. It might be easier > to build a common understanding :) Sure! Cheers, -- intrigeri _______________________________________________ Tails-dev mailing list Tailsfirstname.lastname@example.org https://mailman.boum.org/listinfo/tails-dev To unsubscribe from this list, send an empty email to tails-dev-unsubscr...@boum.org.