Re: LSB 3.0 and who's doing what?
Matt Taggart wrote:
Dave Neil writes...
Looks like the Debian project is going to have to come up with a
decision on this stuff.
Hey you're one of handful the people working on it, what do you think? :)
It looks like an endless catch 22 from my
perspective, based on everything that's been brought up in this thread.
The LSB folks aren't going to budge and if Debian wants to be LSB
compliant for 2.0 or even 3.0, there will have to be some hard choices
The LSB folks do budge, we've file bugs in the past and been granted
exceptions, for example the i18n stuff that wasn't yet accepted upstream and
clearly shouldn't have gone in.
Can we get this matter resolved from the Debian camp soon?
[CC list trimmed]
We can do the i386 arch for Sarge and Etch(testing?) here, and latter
for the ia64.
In order to proceed I think we need,
LSB 2.0 test results for both sarge and etch (on all arches if possible)
LSB 3.0 test results for both sarge and etch (on all arches if possible)
Jeff were you doing these?
The LSB 3.0 tests to release (get your feedback to them now!)
File any cert bugs and get answers on what we're required to fix
A set of needed fixes for 2.0 and 3.0 suitable for
stable-proposed-updates and available at an alternative apt source
Think I covered some of this in reply to Jeff's suggestions.
A proposal for the stable release managers