Re: real LSB compliance
>>>>> "Manoj" == Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
Manoj> If you do things the same old way, I am quite certain
Manoj> things will not be any different. However, there are ways
Manoj> of working with Debian -- firstly, one can send a message
Manoj> to debian-policy and debian-devel when the LSB is entering
Manoj> a review process. One can find a volunteer to feed major
Manoj> proposed changes to the LSB to -policy and -devel for
Manoj> comment.
Manoj> You need to realize that Debian is indeed different,
Manoj> and it is unlikely to get a subset of people that can
Manoj> ``represent'' Debian in something as far reaching as the
Manoj> LSB directives seem to be. Even your example of the
Manoj> government was not on the mark, since we have not had a
Manoj> fully participatory democratic government since the Greek
Manoj> city states.
Manoj> If the LSB is interested in Debian ratification, it
Manoj> must need make an effort to engage the whole project, not
Manoj> just get a few people who also happen to be Debian
Manoj> developers,
Manoj> Of course the LSB project may decide this is too
Manoj> onerous a task, and then we are left with the status Quo.
I find this a bit frustrating because it is so one-sided. It seems
clear to me from reading the constitution that several solutions exist
for Debian to participate in LSB that put more of the responsibility
on Debian than on the LSB. A developer could introduce a resolution
appointing a group of people to represent Debian for LSB.
The technical committee could decide to get involved, possibly after
someone formally asked them to help. It's fairly clear from 6.1 that
this is within their scope.
I'm not actually sure these would be good ideas. I think though that
those within Debian who think the LSB would be a good idea should
consider these and other options. Participation in appropriate
standards organizations is an important part of a technical group and
Debian needs to find a way of accomplishing this. It can't be one
sided; we cannot expect the standards organization to completely
change their process to meet our needs--especially when the process is
already fairly open, but the relationship will not work if they are
not willing to work some to meet our needs. What I'm seeing from
Manoj and many other developers is a presumption that it is entirely
LSB's job to get Debian involved.
It's not clear to me that LSB needs debian to be a generally respected
standard. If LSB ends up being successful as a standard without
Debian's participation or with reduced-effectiveness participation,
then Debian will likely be significantly hurt by not finding a way to
be involved.
Reply to: