[lsb-discuss] Can we find a fit for LSB and Mobile?

Wichmann, Mats D mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Tue Apr 17 03:47:56 UTC 2012

On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 9:55 PM, Ted Ts'o <tytso at mit.edu> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 02:05:38PM -0400, Robert Schweikert wrote:
> >
> > 2.) One of the core charters, at least for as long as I have been
> > involved in the LSB, was to attempt to provide an environment that
> > is targeted towards the Enterprise market.
> I don't know that I would characterize it that way.  Historically, I
> think it would be fairer to say that the goal was to focus where the
> LSB could make an impact.  That happened to be the enterprise market,
> mainly because the year of the desktop was always "next year", and so
> while there were essentially *no* ISV's that were really focusing on
> the desktop market (except for the enterprise desktop/workstation
> market) there were ISV's selling Linux products into the ISV space.

.. etc.

thanks, Ted, for the thoughts.  A lot of good stuff in there.  In
particular you
reminded us of something I also say periodically but hasn't been tossed
out there for a bit:

without getting into a Saturday Night Live style skit about LSB, it's
a floor wax AND a dessert topping...  the term does happen to be
rather overloaded, since it's all of a piece of a trademark reserved for
a very specific purpose, a specification (a part of which is formal enough
to be an ISO standard, although we're not actively maintaining it), and
and an open source/standards project.  when I'm talking about it,
I mean the workgroup/community, if that helps clarify.

hey, what do you mean it's not the year of the desktop?  :)

it does make sense to me to continually evaluate that work being done
is being useful to people by actually solving problems, and that's why
there have been some proposals over time to adjust course a bit.  there
was an interesting proposal about a year ago to leverage the "knowledge
base" that now exists of distribution details and use it to produce a
porting aid that perhaps would not have borne much relationship to
LSB-the-standard-and-associated-tools, and would not have had anything
to do with the LSB Certified mark - that particular proposal did not/has
not gained enough traction but I think it's good we ask such questions.

Jeff put "LSB Charter" on the agenda for the next meeting and I think
that's actually a bit too big of a title, even if that's the way Russ
it, but I'd like to be sure that a "business as usual" LSB 5.0, which as I
add seems overly ambitious in targets given the lack of contributors,
paid or volunteer, is the best thing for the group to be spending its time
In a way I'm becoming an outsider in that discussion; while I have personal
opinions which I will continue to voice (you guys don't get off that
easy) I'm
no longer sponsored to work extensively on the project.

On mobile, Ted mentions Meego... to be pedantic, the effort to do something
that leveraged LSB learnings was actually for its predecessor, Moblin.
The Meego "Compliance" effort used a different approach, because a
number of people had decided the LSB-style approach wasn't going to work
(I'm still not sure what that was based on, since the Moblin approach had
not reached a point where it could either be proven or disproven before the
whole system was discarded in favor of Meego).  Meego proposed a stack-based
approach that you could look sideways at and convince yourself was a little
bit closer to how Android approaches the topic (use the stack as is).
presumably all of you know that that system was discarded its major backers.
There is a binary portability model in consideration for Tizen but
at the moment I'm not in a position to say anything more about it.  Within
the latter two of those three efforts there are major variants that have
interesting constraints, such as In-Vehicle usage, and even there potential
divergences (IVI for cars is not likely to be identical to IVI for yachts

So even from my limited perspective, "mobile" is a very complex topic.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lsb-discuss/attachments/20120416/7af66a6d/attachment.html>

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list