[lsb-discuss] [Fwd: Certification for 3.1 update]

Ian Murdock imurdock at imurdock.com
Tue Mar 6 15:13:34 PST 2007

On 3/6/07, John Cherry <cherry at linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>    - Entered "Runtime environment" under product type.  One of the
>      options was "Internatinalized runtime environment".  Not sure
>      when a distro would use one over the other.

For now, OpenI18n is an additional certification. We'll be folding it
into the mainline LSB in 3.2, assuming we can revive OpenI18n, anyway.

>    - Specified LSB release 3.1.  Do we need a 3.1-update?

No, distros and apps will still certify to LSB 3.1. 3.1 and 3.1 Update
1 are both backward and forward compatible with each other, so we make
no distinction at the certification level, to keep it all simple.

>       - List problem reports - OK, but only listed closed resolution
>         states.  Wouldn't the open bugs be of more interest?
>       - Submit Problem Report - OK, but why are "private bugs" needed?
>         Shouldn't this all be done in the open?  I realize distros may
>         not want to air dirty laundry, but that is price of
>         certification to an open standard.

The RAS team is going to rewrite the problem report system (and, I
believe, tie it into bugzilla somehow). Not sure of details yet.

We do need to allow companies to certify outside of public view, though,
since some companies want to keep their results confidential until their
products have been released.

Ian Murdock

"Don't look back--something might be gaining on you." --Satchel Paige

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list