Re: Back to the Game

[Dan Williams <dcbw redhat com>]

On Tue, 2011-10-11 at 17:33 +0300, Antti Kaijanmäki wrote:
> On 11.10.2011 16:38, Dan Williams wrote:
> > I've also seen submissions for empty GSM networks (no APN provided)
> > because that provider is actually a CDMA network.  CDMA networks
> > *do* have MCC/MNC numbers, but no APNs, so these aren't valid either.
> > The correct thing to do there is add MCC/MNC to the CDMA block DTD.
> >
> > Stuff like that.  Trust, but Verify.
> 
> Hmm.. how about writing a XML Schema which would allow precise 
> introspection of the data for "silly" things? We could then instruct the 
> submitter to run verify.sh before submitting a patch.

Not sure what you mean here.  We have "make check" to validate the XML
against the DTD, and it'll already fail that case.  But I still get
patches for stuff like that sometimes.  So that's not an issue really.

What I meant was more that instead of committing the patches right away
I at least try to verify the data that the users submit through quick
Google searches for the APN and Wikipedia searches for the operator name
and MCC/MNC (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_Network_Code ).

> I think we could update the instructions how to draft the updates and
> then you simply require that every patch is done accordingly:
> 
> http://live.gnome.org/NetworkManager/MobileBroadband/ServiceProviders
> 
> I also received a couple of patches back in the days directly from some
> service providers. I think we could instruct people to turn directly to
> their service providers customer care for right information. If we have
> good instructions how to update the database we could get more direct
> updates from service providers.

Agreed, there should be better info.

> 
> > Other stuff I'd like to see:
> >
> > - MMS details - proxy servers - SMSC addresses
> >
> > But those are harder to find on the web.
> 
> One more reason why we should encourage the users to raise awareness in 
> side their own providers to give us direct support. They just need very 
> clear instructions and point of contact. :)

Definitely.

Dan