[lsb-discuss] Perl, Python in LSB 3.2

[Scott Baeder]

Stew,

I think that as a "large" ISV, I didn't mean to imply that this wouldn't be a good thing to do - include Perl/Python. It's just that for us, with "releases" that cross more platforms than Linux, we will probably ship our own.

On the other hand, there are a LOT of smaller to medium ISV's that may not need to do this once things are more stablized.

I think that moving forward, even if the standard is (to start with) just a specification of what version and where it's located for these willbe a big step forward, and we can look at more complete specifications and the inclusion of additional "modules" over time.

In many ways, this is analogous to the LSB itself, since the core interpreter is the "kernel" and the modules are add on libraries. Start small and grow as necessary over time.

Scott


-----Original Message-----
From: lsb-discuss-bounces at lists.freestandards.org on behalf of Stew Benedict
Sent: Mon 6/18/2007 9:19 AM
To: lsb-discuss
Subject: [lsb-discuss] Perl, Python in LSB 3.2
 

Just to keep the discussion going as we sort of hit a time constraint at 
the F2F.

I think I heard a pretty strong "no" to just specifying /usr/bin/perl, 
/usr/bin/python as being a usable solution.

I also think I heard the message that the large ISVs are likely to still 
ship their own Python, Perl, Java, etc.,as the stakes are too high to 
depend on behavior of the distribution copy.

So, to reiterate Mats' earlier question, is what we're trying to do with 
Perl (Python is likely to be similar), going to meet the needs of those 
ISVs that feel LSB needs to include these languages?

http://www.linux-foundation.org/~stewb/lsb-perl/perlspec/

That is:

Define interpreter binary location, minimum version
Define a list of modules expected to be present, with a reference to the 
upstream language specification. At this point, "the list" for Perl, is 
only modules coming from the base perl tarball, nothing from CPAN, etc.

It looks like we have a promising resource in the Perl Foundation, with 
Allison, but before I ask them to do the work to write a language spec 
with the proper specification language, I want to make sure we're actually 
going to be solving the perceived problem in not having these languages as 
part of LSB.

I'd also like to make sure we're on track before I burn too many cycles 
patching a few hundred more perl tests to run against the installed perl.

-- 
Stew Benedict
The Linux Foundation

_______________________________________________
lsb-discuss mailing list
lsb-discuss at lists.freestandards.org
http://lists.freestandards.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss