On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 07:42:02AM -0700, Wichmann, Mats D wrote:
> I don't think the openi18n team got a lot of traction
> with upstream maintainers for their patches when they
> were just representative of that group.
One thing to note, is that adding them to the LSB doesn't seem to have
given them much more traction; it's just encouraged distributions to
fork the various packages, which is probably a Bad Thing. Finding the
right balance is a hard problem.
> Hopefully
> now with at least one level of that project brought into
> LSB 1.3, it will be a little easier to stimulate dialogue
> about the right way to solve the issues raised.
It's not clear from the specs or website exactly what "brought into LSB
1.3" means -- is it impossible to get any level of LSB certification
without OpenI18n support, or is the non-internationalised runtime
environment option still open? I doubt Debian will be willing to fork
as extensively as other distributions apparently have, and I doubt
patches that are acceptable to upstream will be forthcoming particularly
soon.
Cheers,
/\_ <-- Debian release manager baseball cap
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.
``Is this some kind of psych test?
Am I getting paid for this?''
Attachment:
pgpsAGVAGK6RD.pgp
Description: PGP signature