[lsb-discuss] LSB conf call notes for 2008-02-20
jeff at licquia.org
Wed Feb 20 09:08:08 PST 2008
Attendees: Jeff, Russ Herrold, Sam, Dan Kohn, Stew, George Kraft, Ted,
Darren Davis, Mats, Marc Miller, Jesper, Kay Tate, Vladimir, Alexey.
Jeff: making changes to bzr. Commit messages are now going to
lsb-messages. Will be upgrading the repository formats; everyone should
be looking at upgrading their bzr to 0.92 or better.
Java. Jeff heard a video podcast with some Java folks, sent them email.
Someone should be joining the conversation from Sun soon.
Ted: looking at next round of distros; 1st quarter 2009, could slip.
Enterprise targeting will be for current generation for the next few
years. RHEL 6/SLES 11 won't be directly targeted for a while. Should
LSB 4 target the current enterprise distros? Easier to target, less
guesswork involved. Goerge: LSB 3.3? Ted: how do we define versions?
Will there be a substantial enough change? Backwards compatibility vs.
enterprise distro changes. Russ: will always develop to the lowest
common denominator. Jeff: still backward incompatible changes even in
RHEL 5. Russ: ship multiple binaries? Jeff: apps vs. distros; LSB 3
apps will run on LSB 4 distros, but LSB 4 apps may not run on LSB 3
distros. Russ: SpikeSource is developing for LSB 3 for that reason.
Ted: how long will the enterprise distros maintain compatibility back to
the RHEL 3 timeframe? Russ: trust ISV deployment. RHEL 3 is starting
to die off. Jeff: support RHEL 4 for LSB 4? Some of that isn't going
to happen; Qt 4 isn't in RHEL 4. Darren: major bump in LSB reflect
major bump in distros? Ted: want to attract more ISVs. Jeff: tension
between newer core and newer features. Darren: the distros probably
won't pull in changes just to do LSB 4 on the older distros. Ted: the
idea would be that RHEL 5 and SLES 10 won't need to change to certify to
LSB 4.0. Dan: could also certify the older distros ourselves;
continuous testing against the major enterprise distros in the 4.0
process. Russ: this seems to satisfy both ISV concerns. Ted: also
helps the development process; if we make decisions in April, will we
know what RHEL 6/SLES 11 by then? Also, ISVs won't ship for a long time.
Kay: Java in a service pack for the distros? Ted: they ship now. Kay:
do they have all the stuff they're supposed to? Ted: once we have Java
sections of the spec, shouldn't be too difficult to do that as a service
Ted: need Canonical and Red Hat people on the call. Jeff: SuSE too;
Darren is more the ISV side of Novell.
Ted: we should target RHEL5, SLES10, and Ubuntu Hardy for 4.0. Make
sense? Jeff: should be plenty to do. Pain of prediction. LSB 5? Ted:
don't want to make that decision now. Maybe do LSB 5 by end of 2009,
assuming on-time release of LSB 4.
Jeff: what does that mean in terms of work? Stack checking, gcc 4.x
C++, long-double. Ted: missing features in 2.5 may not be so
interested. Hash style may be the hot issue; need to check whether
having both hashes breaks glibc 2.4 systems (SLES 10). Mats: in 3.x, we
force the old hash because of a gcc bug; should check to see if that's
Jeff: should post the proposal to the list. Ted will do it.
Kay: Navigator updates due today, not done yet because of staff issues.
Will probably be a week late. Ted: still important. Kay: will cut
off if need be, and do more later.
More information about the lsb-discuss