Supported routers vs really supported routers - problems with description

[moeller0]

@yuoiew3

On every device's page, there should be information whether the device is still maintained. And it should be verified, let say every few months.

One of the core principles in open source has long been, those who feel an itch, scratch it, if that scratching action helps other excellent, but at the core is still someone feeling something that needs change and acting on that feeling. So every time you see a "should" in OpenWrt please understand that these are your itches (others may or may not share these). So it would be very much in the spirit of opensource if you would start doing that for the one or few devices where you feel competent enough to do so. Such actions, if reasonably successful, grow respect and good-will and might convince others to participate.

[frollic]

@Dante

Don't forget about reg domains, DFS, EEE, DSA, compatibility with different client devices, various upstream hardware, radio emissions, beamforming, working in congested environments, throughput, both wired and wireless

OP needs to travel the world to verify regdb's actually correct, everywhere, on site.

@Dante

this is not a random corpo where you can barge in and tell people what they should do to show a pretty burn down chart at the end of the sprint.

Perhaps they're working for Accenture...

[LilRedDog]

@yuoiew3

I clearly see, there is a management problem.

@moeller0

One of the core principles in open source has long been,

@yuoiew3

I know what open-source software involves: unpaid time of volunteers

I'm not sure how to follow that; I'm that good.

[Borromini]

That's funny. I thought Qualcomm was?

[brada4]

Typically new releases arrive with regression rushed for last evening.