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

Re: Playing with the spec



>>"Nik" == Nik Clayton <nik@freebsd.org> writes:

 Nik> My point is that we should not be concentrating on trying to
 Nik> build a one size fits all collection of packages and scripts to
 Nik> handle installation of all the appropriate bits and pqieces, and
 Nik> then drive that installation.

        Perhaps te scripts et al shuld be called one *possible*
 reference implementation? I think that it would still be useful to
 have one a reference implementation that vendors may choose to follow.

 Nik> I realise that this is almost all documentation, with no coding
 Nik> required, and that's probably going to turn a lot of you off the
 Nik> whole idea, but I don't see that we need to do much more.

        Firstly, I think that the documentation should be created in
 any case. If the implementation is deemed a reference one, rather
 than mandatory, this should satisfy the BSD folks (and others, who do
 things very differently from the reference).

        Of course, the LSB may choose to make the reference
 implementation mandatory for the Linux distribution conformance to
 the LSB, but that is a Linux internal requirement that does not
 impact the wider DocBook community.

        manoj
-- 
 Eat as much as you like -- just don't swallow it. Harry Secombe's
 diet
Manoj Srivastava   <srivasta@debian.org>  <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


Reply to: