[lsb-discuss] LSB conf call notes for 2007-09-12
ddavis at novell.com
Thu Sep 13 04:14:48 PDT 2007
I was out of the office due to attending the SUSE Labs conference in the
Czech Republic, so here is my update...
Jeff Licquia wrote:
> Attendees: Jeff, Mats, Kay Tate, Marvin, Alexey, Marc Miller, Sam,
> Stew, John Cherry, Robert Schweikert, Vladimir, George Kraft
> f2f: Planning to move the meeting to the week of November 5. Novell
> has already OKed it. Robert, Mats: beginning of week is better. No
> Schedule: Mats has posted a proposal to the list. Issues w/ CUPS and
> ALSA; also, no one is currently working on build_env. Stew: 1.2
> symbols? SuSE has 1.1. Robert: test for 1.2? Jeff: nervous; the API
> doesn't support that, so we'd only be able to do it by leaving library
> references unresolved. Stew: documentation versions to reference in
> the standard? Robert: pull in instead of reference? Mats: GTK+ and
> Perl have agreed to a stable spec published at a specific location;
> need same for CUPS. Question regarding trademark issues; Jeff will
> ask Apple.
> ALSA? Could go in as optional for 3.2. Is it useful? What about
> OSS, now that it's open-sourced? Robert: can we ship higher layers?
> Is it too dangerous to commit? Kay: would help Java. John: ALSA
> isn't used directly; most apps use higher layers, but no consensus on
> which. Robert: can the higher layers be shipped? Jeff: Difficult
> question; most involve a runtime daemon as well as an API. Robert:
> are we picking a winner with OSS? Doesn't seem to be any momentum
> behind OSS; there are technical issues as well as (solved) licensing
> issues. Even if ALSA is deprecated, it will have to be supported for
> some time, so the danger is minimal.
> "Leaving behind": Mats is working on a proposal. "optional" -> "trial
> use", have regular votes on the status, to either extend trial, throw
> out, or make required. Robert: only one extension vote.
> Completeness? Jeff: should they be on by default? Robert: turn on
> tests? Jeff: that's what we do now, not getting the results. Robert:
> OK. Jeff: 3.2? Robert: can make preliminary statement for 3.2. Qt 4
> should move forward.
> API data: Kay's group moving forward, no data yet. They will
> accomodate the category request. Robert has been busy.
Novell has sent data for several of our proprietary applications to ISP
RAS and they have loaded it into the database. I believe Alexey said
that the data should be available to browse soon. He sent me a quick
report, and it looks good.
> Java: no progress. Kay will send out some stats on Java usage; also
> references earlier white paper. Posted to minutes? Jeff will look.
> George: there will be a post to the list regarding requirements for
> making IBM Java LSB-compliant. ALSA figures prominently here.
I am looking to gather some data around Novell's Java applications that
may help out here. I will report more next week.
> lsb-discuss mailing list
> lsb-discuss at lists.linux-foundation.org
More information about the lsb-discuss