[lsb-discuss] LSB conf call notes for 2008-09-10
Jeff Licquia
jeff at licquia.org
Fri Sep 12 06:35:40 PDT 2008
Attendees: Jeff Licquia, Stew Benedict, Mats Wichmann, Ron Hale-Evans,
Robert Schweikert, Kay Tate, Jiri Dluhos, Ted Tso
Jeff: Bug meetings have been going well. Biggest issue is probably the
pace.
Jeff: best-effort merged. Mats: broke some things in a more interesting
way; wrong #define in a header. Based on needing different defines for
C and C++.
SI. Jeff: tested with libchk and cmdchk; sent results to Antonio.
NSS/NSPR. Ron: narrowed NSPR down to the bare minimum on the list.
Jeff: is that list in? Mats: older list in, will probably shrink. Ron:
in snapshot? Jeff: do we have spec for what we are keeping? Mats:
there's a pointer to upstream docs; looks like only one case of
something missing, but need to check more. If anyone concludes that
they want to use NSPR (as opposed to being forced to use it), they will
be disappointed. Ted: what would people want from NSPR? Could we
create a sample app? Mats: can create sample. Very difficult to use
the full lib if we provide a stub. Robert: if people want more from
NSPR, they'll complain. Mats: fine with that. Ted: could be part of
LSB 4.1. Mats: should record in the notes that we should create a
sample program using NSS, possibly put on LDN. Ted: pretty obvious
article for Brian to put up. Jeff: could get the NSS folks to write the
article for us. Ted: that or put the article up. Ron: what's the
utility of marking the NSPR interfaces as optional, since we're pointing
to a spec on the web anyway? Mats: more specifically, should we just
leave the things that are in already. Jeff: each addition reduces our
test coverage. We're OK with that if we're adding something people
want, but need to be more cautious when adding something people don't
want. Ted: also, if we weren't past feature freeze, we might be more
liberal.
Jeff: new tests from ISPRAS for Qt 3, Qt 4, T2C C++ tests. Mats: have
to add all those, plus appchk-shell. Stew: makelsbpkg. Mats: still
bugs on building; appchk-shell still expects to connect to the database.
Jeff: olver-core-tests still outstanding. Mats: probably a good idea
to wait until they're all ready; lots of updates to do, better to do all
at once. Will likely have problems with build times. Jeff: repos now
generating. Task packages. Mats: when you update something built out
of packaging but lives elsewhere, we often forget to bump the version
number. Jeff: won't matter until the beta. Mats: right; date stamps.
Perhaps we should pull the package version from the place where the code
lives. Jeff: get rid of packaging? Mats: already done for the big test
suites; the remaining ones are ones that pull code from multiple places.
Maybe a post-4.0 thing. Jeff: definitely not 4.0. Mats: would be
nice to build packages immediately from source after changing. Jeff:
task pkgs to own project? Mats: interesting. Ted: already going this way.
Jeff: NSS tests? Stew: in bad shape. Jeff: OK, shouldn't wait for NSS
to add them to the autobuilder. Ted: these are upstream tests? Stew:
yes; not exactly done the same way we do tests. More functional than
interface tests.
Mats: who will add the new stuff? Jeff: me and Michael. Mats: you know
that arch-independent packages are only built once? Built on amd64;
files are different than the others, making this a maintenance headache.
Stuff could be driver from the server side; the server could say
"build this" as opposed to having the autobuilder itself keep track of
these things.
Ted: bug-fixing activities? Jeff: summary. Biggest issue is progress;
25 out of 200.
Mats: ALSA is still trial-use. We have to vote on it for each release.
Should plan for that to be done. Robert: ALSA problem is testing.
Jeff: ALSA issues. Vote before the RC? Robert: need time to do the
change? Ted: easy. Mats: prefer to vote before the beta, but
definitely before the RC.
Jeff: what to do before vote? ALSA, xdg-utils, Java? Ron: still
licensing issues in Java, some minor text issues. Mats: need to move
some wording. Should also do something with xdg-utils. Need to gather
information for vote. Jeff: ALSA: correctness and testing, xdg-utils:
deployment info. Ted: for Java, should wait to let some of the legal
issues percolate. Robert: agree. Mats: Sun folks themselves suggested
that this should be trial-use first time around. Jeff: new? Cairo, NSS
Jeff: process? Ted: don't want to ignite the legal flamewar over Java
again. Robert: wording.
Mats: lsb linker version update. ld-lsb.so.3 -> ld-lsb.so.4. Less
reason to do this this time, but should need to discuss it. Ted: take
it to the list? Mats: will post today.
More information about the lsb-discuss
mailing list