[lsb-discuss] Unofficial LSB conference call minutes (2012-04-18, 11 to noon)

Craig Scott audiofanatic at gmail.com
Wed Apr 18 22:00:26 UTC 2012

>  - Getting started with the LSB
> Russ speaks to both the desire of the present developer / conference call
> participants for 'hands to co-develop'; Also out there is recreating a pool
> of people USING the LSB as candidates for conversion into co-developers as
> well.  The mailing list simply no longer has new people coming to us and
> asking how to get started
> Jeff: no question the k.o melt-down hurt; publicity efforts had to go to a
> back burner
> Use cases are a good way to sell; Russ: are copies of prior systematic
> marketing documents around from perhaps 3 or 4 years ago that could be
> useful; Jeff; not so much as LF was more focused on advancing the LDN.  LF
> has gotten less 'possessive' on branding issues (Meego, Yacto, Tizen spun
> out to stand alone domains, and are simply enumerated with out-links at the
> current LF web presence)
The LSB might get more people creating LSB-compliant packages if there
wasn't a cost associated with being able to say your package was LSB
compliant. Few are going to bother with the cost associated with saying
their application is LSB compliant (I'm not talking about distros here).
For most ISV's who bother, it would be enough to simply make their packages
LSB compliant but not actually state that. This does the LSB itself no
favours, since it doesn't get any income out of it and it doesn't get any
publicity. I can't help but wonder if application packages need something a
bit less rigorous. Perhaps if a package passes the automated application
checker, that should be enough for that vendor to publicly state that their
package is LSB compliant? I know this would slightly loosen the rules a
bit, but if you want to give the LSB some visibility without impacting the
standard itself, this might be one way to do it.

Craig Scott
Melbourne, Australia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lsb-discuss/attachments/20120419/4b70551e/attachment.html>

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list