linuxaudio.org

On Thursday 26 February 2004 09:37, Daniel James wrote:
> Rather than have centralised co-ordination, you mean? Sounds like a

quoted text
> bit of a free-for-all. I think a donor company would rather be

> working with a single contact who would take responsibility for the

> hardware.

But coordinating between counties and projects is a lot of work for a single

person.  What about saying that each project/company uses their nominated

person on the board of LinuxAudio to do all this discussion? Then everyone

involved is recognised and seen as being "responsible" at least.
> Here I think the consortium could have a role in making the hardware

quoted text
> to the people who could make the best use of it.

>

> Perhaps instead of rotating the hardware, we could set up a scheme

> whereby one developer or site 'X' agrees to be the maintainer of

> support for device 'Y', and other developers who want to test their

> software on 'Y' have to work with 'X'. That way, 'X' gets the benefit

> of having the loan hardware on-site, but also has the responsibility

> to work with the community on support for it.

I don't think you'll get much joy trying to impose a structure on how either

the hardware or the work could be distributed.  It's up to people to work as

they feel like it - if they can get their hands on the hardware then and

there then that'll help it out.  I think the approach here has to be

pragmatic as in many cases if the interested developer wants some hardware

they can always buy it if they can afford it or just approach the vendor

directly for loan stuff.  It'd be nice if LinuxAudio.org helped with this

process rather than tried to impose a regime to it - that's probably not what

you meant but that's what it sounds like.
R