26 Feb
2004
26 Feb
'04
11:42 a.m.
But coordinating between counties and projects is a
lot of work for
a single person.
I meant one named person per piece of hardware, rather than one person
for all hardware - the latter approach could cause problems if a
third party did not return the hardware.
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
Sure - I meant that people would volunteer to be responsible for a
particular device, not some kind of centralised allocation system.
I'd guess that some devices would suit certain developers' skills and
interests more than others - there's not much point sending a
controller keyboard to a developer who isn't working on MIDI stuff,
for example.
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
Quite - but potentially these could be expensive pieces of hardware
loaned to developers releasing 'free as in beer' software. They may
also be pre-production models unavailable in the shops, or equipment
bartered for software support.
or just approach the vendor directly for loan
stuff.
I think that would be unlikely to succeed if lots of different
developers were making competing claims for the same kit.
It'd be nice if LinuxAudio.org helped with this
process
rather than tried to impose a regime to it
I did mean the hardware that the consortium was offered as a group,
not to interfere with relationships that individual members have (or
would like to have) with manufacturers.
Cheers
Daniel