[Cyril Brulebois] > So the question becomes: should they be moved to git? Keeping the manual > as a special snowflake leaving under d-i's svn is OK (mostly to avoid > translators' having to learn about a new tool), but keeping debian-boot > maintained packages under a different scm under a different group seems > a bad idea.
If someone got the time to do so, I believe that would be a good thing to do. But my recommondation would be to switch to isenkram-cli with appstream as the data souce and ask for the removal of discover. > I don't know a lot about appstream metadata, but I mentioned during > the BoF we could just embed a fw file→fw package mapping at build time > to ease lookup (basically what you're doing with apt-file, except we > would have a static list in the d-i image; for one thing, there's no > guarantee network is available at early stages to query Contents from > mirrors). I've already implemented this idea in isenkram. The isenkram-cli package contain an embedded copy of the list of packages with files in /lib/firmware/, fetched from the apt-file data set. This is part of the background for my recommondation to move to isenkram-cli for mapping hardware to firmware and user space packages. When the same information is available from appstream, I suspect we want to include appstream data on the installation media, instead of embedding it in isenkram-cli. -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen
