<div dir="ltr">> You aren't talking about open source. You're talking about proprietary software distribution. From a FOSS perspective, the best <div> > practice is not to use it. > > Scott K</div> <div> </div><div>Agree with you on that one, ideally if only Nvidia drivers and the many wireless cards had open-source drivers this would be solved easily, I would actually prefer that. Unfortunately we live in the real world where many companies still use archaic proprietary methods and we have to work with them to make sure something like Ubuntu can be useful for everyone. Sincerely, I hope Nvidia switches to open-source and makes this easier, but that's going to take a long time to achieve. In the mean time the best we can do is publish Nvidia drivers within days of release and make sure everyone is using the best possible up-to-date versions. To do otherwise just makes an already bad situation - proprietary Nvidia drivers - even worse.</div> <div> </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Scott Kitterman <<a href="mailto:ubuntu@kitterman.com" target="_blank">ubuntu@kitterman.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">AG Restringere <<a href="mailto:ag.restringere@gmail.com">ag.restringere@gmail.com</a>> wrote: >> If you have a support contract with Canonical, then maybe Canonical >has a >> support obligation, but Ubuntu, in particular for proprietary >software, >has no >> support "obligation". > >No, that's not it, let's not confuse the issue, the commercial side and >Canonical has nothing do with what I'm currently advocating. I never >mentioned Canonical because I was distinguishing this from the >commercial >side of things. This is purely a community support and engineering >best-practices issue, not a commercial issue. The Linux Kernel guys >have no >commercial contracts with us but they embrace "best practices" and use >the >best recommendations to make sure they provide the best support for the >Kernel. It's not commercial it's a community support obligation and >engineering best-practices. > >This is the basis for the open-source Linux community, people helping >each >other to obtain the best possible systems. It's also the purpose of >Ubuntu, "I am because of who we all are" and "Linux for human beings". >To >suggest that we need commercial contracts just to get proper device >support >for very mainstream and common graphics cards defeats the whole purpose >of >open-source Linux distributions, you might as well get an Apple Mac or >Windows computer, there's no point to it. It's like saying we need a >commercial contract with the Linux Foundation just to get support for >Intel >and AMD CPU's, it's absurd. > > >On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 3:35 PM, Scott Kitterman ><<a href="mailto:ubuntu@kitterman.com">ubuntu@kitterman.com</a>>wrote: > >> If you have a support contract with Canonical, then maybe Canonical >has a >> support obligation, but Ubuntu, in particular for proprietary >software, >> has no >> support "obligation". >> >> Scott K >> >> On Friday, September 06, 2013 15:14:55 AG Restringere wrote: >> > It's very simple: >> > >> > Nvidia "certifies" a driver in the "long lived branch", when it >releases >> a >> > new stable driver it recommends every Linux user to install that >driver >> > immediately for the best experience. Ubuntu has a support >obligation >> make >> > the latest most up-to-date "certified" drivers available to all >users of >> > currently supported versions especially 12.04 LTS, 13.04 and 13.10. > If >> > Ubuntu publishes out-of-date drivers and doesn't replace them when >> there's >> > a newer one available it's a major problem. Graphics drivers, >second to >> > the Linux Kernel itself and networking/wifi drivers, are the most >> important >> > drivers on a desktop system, they require a very consistent and >high >> level >> > of maintenance to keep a system in good working order. >> > >> > *Linux x86/IA32* >> > Latest Long Lived Branch version: >> > 319.49< >> <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-319.49-driver.html" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-319.49-driver.html</a>> >> > <-- >> > this is the STABLE driver, anything before this is out-of-date >> > Latest Short Lived Branch version: >> > 325.15< >> <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-325.15-driver.html" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-325.15-driver.html</a>> >> > <-- >> > this is the BETA driver, for testing purposes >> > Latest Legacy GPU version (304.xx series): >> > 304.108< >> <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-304.108-driver.html" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-304.108-driver.html</a>> >> > <-- >> > this is for legacy users, those with old graphics cards >> > Latest Legacy GPU version (71.86.xx series): >> > 71.86.15< >> <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-71.86.15-driver.htm" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-71.86.15-driver.htm</a> >> > l> <-- >> > these are all other legacy drivers for even older cards >> > Latest Legacy GPU version (96.43.xx series): >> > 96.43.23< >> <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-96.43.23-driver.htm" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-96.43.23-driver.htm</a> >> > l> <-- >> > Latest Legacy GPU version (173.14.xx series): >> > 173.14.37< >> <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-173.14.37-driver.h" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-ia32-173.14.37-driver.h</a> >> > tml> <-- >> > >> > <a href="http://www.nvidia.com/object/unix" target="_blank">http://www.nvidia.com/object/unix</a> >> > >> > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Jordon Bedwell ><<a href="mailto:jordon@envygeeks.com">jordon@envygeeks.com</a>> >> wrote: >> > > On Fri, Sep 6, 2013 at 1:50 PM, Paulo Roberto de Oliveira Castro >> > > >> > > <<a href="mailto:p.oliveira.castro@gmail.com">p.oliveira.castro@gmail.com</a>> wrote: >> > > > Yes, that is what I was trying to say. >> > > > They want it work and to be as fast as it can be, without >worrying >> about >> > > >> > > it. >> > > >> > > I'm out of this one, the straw man just came out. >> > > >> > > -- >> > > Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list >> > > <a href="mailto:Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com">Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com</a> >> > > Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> > > <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss</a> >> >> -- >> Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list >> <a href="mailto:Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com">Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com</a> >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss</a> >> > > </div></div>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ <div class="im">> >-- >Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list ><a href="mailto:Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com">Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com</a> >Modify settings or unsubscribe at: ><a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss</a> </div>You aren't talking about open source. You're talking about proprietary software distribution. From a FOSS perspective, the best practice is not to use it. Scott K <div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"> -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list <a href="mailto:Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com">Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com</a> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: <a href="https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss" target="_blank">https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss</a> </div></div></blockquote></div> </div>