Face lift for hardware platforms pages

[Breen Ouellette <the_(_dot_)_man_(_at_)_breeno_(_dot_)_net>]

Since nobody has said anything regarding this particular post, I'd like 
to call attention to it again, just in case it was overlooked. I can say 
from my own experience that I would only buy hardware that I knew came 
from suppliers which were active in the process. It would definitely be 
good to relegate some hardware, such as 3ware, to a second class status.

Perhaps the only problem with this is that it does down play the hard 
work that developers have put into reverse engineering. But perhaps the 
time has come that reverse engineering should be treated as something 
that developers shouldn't have to put up with.

Breeno

Marco Feenstra wrote:

> Can the OpenBSD homepage be used to promote products bymanufacturers 
> who care.
> Like with AMD / VIA for example, it seems that they actively support 
> OpenBSD with docs/hardware, these get a place on the homepage/ Best 
> Manufacturer / Tier 1 supported page.
> Tier 1 : 2-4 sets of hardware supplied + Full Documentation
> Tier 2 : Full Documentation supplied
> Tier 3 : Supply nothing and hope people buy their stuff, In short they 
> will never be mentioned.
>
> There is also a lot of hardware supported by OpenBSD, but without 
> support from the manufacturer. These will not be named on this page, 
> it will only be named within the current supported hardware page.
>
> In this case the hardware manufacturers who already know that this is 
> a win win situation can be stimulated further due to them being 
> mentioned on the Best manufacturer page. That company will know that 
> we will push our users in their direction, active participation from 
> the OpenBSD side because we get active participation from their side.
> For the OpenBSD experience from a new user perspective it is easier to 
> distinquish the good from the bad and ugly.
>
> Marco Feenstra
> Sysadmin @ SuqAta
>
>
>
> Theo de Raadt wrote:
>
> > > Over the years I've seen many situations where many different people
> > > have spent months or years trying to get companies to open their
> > > documentation and/or firmware. Each person who takes the time to make
> > > such requests has no idea how many others have tried before them or how
> > > many times the others may have tried.
> > >   
> >
> >
> > Well, someone does know: The vendor.  And that I suppose is the key
> > player.
> >
> >  
> >
> > > Would it be worthwhile to create a mailing list where people can cc' 
> > > the
> > > list when they make such requests?
> > >
> > > Having an archived mail list, maybe activism@, of all such 
> > > communication
> > > could be a real help in convincing decision makers about potential
> > > markets they are missing. It would be nice to have numbers like "X"
> > > People have taken the time to contact your company over the last "Y"
> > > Months/Years regarding the release of "Z" so complete and correct open
> > > source support can be built for your product.
> > >   
> >
> >
> > Perhaps.  I'm not sure if it helps.
> >
> > Want to help?  Get this message out to the Linux and other bsd projects;
> > this affects their users just as much as if affects ours.  Even if you
> > have to drop the issue onto their mailing lists by simply forwarding
> > our initial requests.
> >
> > Half of activism is waking the sleepers.