[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Core/Layer vs. GUI


	Looks like this whole discussion process has just become
completely counter-productive.  Both the "there should be a core/layer"
people and the "We just need to get the spec done ASAP for the ISV's who
will use it" people are not coming to an agreement.

	So, I concede that if the LSB developers wish to define a useful
API for ISV's, that is a noble goal, and I do not wish to stand in their
way any longer.  I think the continued discussion of why it should be done
another way is not going to foster any progress.

	Therefore, I have come to the conclusion that the LSB project is a
good project, but not the only way of doing things.  I have drafted an
early proposal for another project, that may in fact complement the LSB
upon completion.  Anyone interested is welcome to join, discuss, etc
Hopefully, this will allow the LSB project to continue on it's own course,
and develop a useable spec for software developers sometime soon, and take
some of the conflict out of this discussion.

DRAFT: (not final)

	An x86 branch of BUILD has begun, and the ETA of Level 1 is
approximately one month, with Level 2 following shortly afterwards.  There
are currently several people willing to work on this project, and there
has been some (un-named) interest from some hardware vendors.

	I'd prefer not to make it "public" (as in SlashDot or FreshMeat)
until some of the structure (mailing lists, hosting, etc), and legal
(Trademark terms, technical wording of draft) issues are sorted out.

	Hopefully, this will back some of the pressure off of this
discussion ;-)

Rob C.

On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Steve Schveighoffer wrote:
> Michael Stone wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, Mar 27, 2000 at 10:22:58PM +0200, delau wrote:
> > > How about dedicated servers? It would be nice if I could select "LSB Core"
> > > and "Bind" for a dedicated DNS server. I wouldn't need X or any other GUI
> > > for that, do I? And because I installed a LSB compliant system, I should be
> > > able to add another package to add functionality (a FTP server to load my
> > > zone files for example).
> > 
> > Why does there need to be a specification for dns servers? For an
> > application that simple, I'm not sure that LSB is relevant. To date, LSB
> > has concentrated on desktop applications--because that's where the
> > problems are.
> > 
> Yeah, but don't DNS servers need to have the correct version of libc? 
> Don't DNS server developers want to avoid porting to different linux
> systems?  Wouldn't DNS developers want a proven packaging method to
> install on "LSB compliant" systems?  The same argument for having an LSB
> exists for every application developed by a third party, not just GUI
> apps.
> -Steve
> -- 
> To send email to me, send it to:
> schveiguy aht yahoo dot com.
> -- 
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to lsb-discuss-request@lists.linuxbase.org
> with subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Email listmaster@lists.linuxbase.org

Reply to: