Re: RFC
Robert W Current, Ph D <current@hel-inc.com> writes:
> I have been a UNIX user for over 6 years now. I have followed the
> LSB since before there was a LSB. I have seen it get tons of press,
> have great ideas, and fade slowly into the background. I think it's
> time for a swift kick in the rear end!
Hi Rob.
Is that an offer to help? There is now an LSB task list located at
http://sourceforge.net/pm/?group_id=1107
The list is not finished yet, but between it and unfinished parts of
the spec and stuff that the test suite doesn't cover, there's enough
work to be done. A small number of people are concentrating on that
work and we're working on increasing our manpower.
> Second, any issue of "software packaging" should NOT be standardized
> by the LSB.
It does need to be handled (at least the binary package format) by the
LSB because 3rd party application vendors need to have a way to
deliver their software to LSB-compliant systems. For now, the format
is .rpm since everyone supports it.
> Third, although I believe .tgz, .deb, .rpm, and the like are something
> the LSB shouldn't endorse, I do feel that how these packaging systems
> interact with what is "a LSB Compliant System" must be addressed. This
> can NOT be avoided. THINGS MUST CHANGE!
>
> Packaging systems must be free to develop on thier own, and do thier own
> thing. BUT, most likely, all of them will have to be "adjusted" so that
> they fit within the scheme of what it is that the LSB is trying to
> address.
I'm not sure if you agree or disagree with me.
> And, finally.... IT'S BROKE! Yes, IT'S BROKE! We MUST FIX IT. No "if
> it ain't broke, don't fix it" stuff applies. There is an absolute need
> to change some of the fundumental underlying structure of what "Linux"
> is... "Linux" must be DEFINED!
You could also use the word "documented" instead of "defined".
Actually, I don't think you're disagreeing with our current approach
very much. Have you looked at the draft specification?
Also, this list doesn't get much traffic. It's mostly on lsb-spec,
our meetings, and biweekly LSB specification conference calls (see the
talks web page).
Dan
Reply to:
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: RFC
- From: "Robert W. Current, Ph.D." <current@hel-inc.com>
- References:
- RFC
- From: "Robert W. Current, Ph.D." <current@hel-inc.com>