Re: real LSB compliance
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 02:04:48PM +1000, Steven Hanley wrote:
> it is not a case of does LSB (and who is LSB anyway, [...])
The LSB is a group of people who want to find a common ground amongst
GNU/Linux distributions to enable third party software to be easily
installed on any of them.
> [...does LSB] want debian to be involved.
One would presume they want every distribution involved --- otherwise
they're not going to meet their goals.
> The onus is not on people participating in LSB to come onto the debian lists
> and attempt to get us to take notice of them and talk with them.
I'm sorry, but it is. Debian's goal is to make a self contained free
software distribution. Running non-free and external stuff on that is an
interesting added bonus, but it's far from core to our goals. Contrast
this with the goals of the LSB project, which aims to get non-free and
external software running on all the GNU/Linux distributions. If we
don't really care about it, and you do really care about it, it's *your*
job to put the effort into finding something agreeable all 'round.
Also, consider the aphorism: ``We reject: kings, presidents, and
voting. We believe in: rough consensus and working code.''
Then consider what's being said in this thread: Debian should vote on
a representative to send to the LSB who has complete executive power
to commit Debian to a course of action, and should support a spec that
many Debian developers believe is flawed in important ways, and hasn't
yet been fully implemented.
I know it's annoying that all this is only being brought up after the
request-for-comments period, but, well, that's quite simply too bad. It's
better to get the thing into a workable state late than never.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Reply to: