Re: X and LSB
On Thu, Mar 16, 2000 at 04:10:10PM -0500, Robert W. Current Jr. Ph.D. wrote:
> On 16 Mar 2000, Daniel Quinlan wrote:
> > The goal of the LSB is to guarantee that third-party applications can
> > run on any LSB-compliant Linux distribution.
> This is a major stance your taking, and I think you may regret it. By
> saying the LSB is in place to service only ISVs and the like, the LSB will
> essentially be seen by the Linux community as "A orginization trying to
> impose standards so that commercial software vendors can exploit Linux.
> The LSB has no basis in defining standards for Linux, but rather is an
> orginization that serves as mediator between the Big 3 Distributions and
> commercial software vendors."
Now I'm confused. DQ is saying that LSB is trying to find common ground
between the distributions in order to give ISVs some assurance that
their apps will run on some large portion of linux systems. How can you
accuse him of attempting to *impose* standards? IIRC, you're the one
suggesting that current practices be abandoned, not him.
Do you recall:
> So, yes, that is a "top down" standard. That's what I believe it
> should be. To say it should just list the de facto standards sounds
> like it's just wasting everyones time.
- X and LSB
- From: Daniel Quinlan <email@example.com>
- Re: X and LSB
- From: "Robert W. Current Jr. Ph.D." <firstname.lastname@example.org>