[lsb-discuss] unoffficial LSB conference call minutes for 12 12 12

R P Herrold herrold at owlriver.com
Wed Dec 12 17:15:55 UTC 2012

LSB teleconference

Wednesday, 12 Dec 2012 @11:00 to noon, US ET

Where:	(605) 715-4920 Access Code: 512468

Gobby:	gobby -j lsb-temp.pmman.net:6522 with passwd: LSB

IRC channels are:
 	#lsb-meeting at freenode.net during meetings
 	#lsb at freenode.net most other times

in the form : name (organization)  [irc_nick]
Stew Benedict (LF)  stewb
Jeff Licquia (LF)  licquia
Russ Herrold (Owl River)  orc_emac
Glen Petrie (Epson)
Robert Schweikert (SuSE)  robjo
Rick Troth (Velocity Software) rickt

Denis Silakov (ROSA Labs)  denis_silakov
Alan Clark (SuSE)  AlanClark
Darren Davis (SuSE)
Jiri Dluhos (SUSE)  jdluhos
Kay Tate (SuSE)  ktate
Alexey Khoroshilov (ISP RAS)  Alexey
Carlos O'Donell (Mentor Graphics) odonell

Mats Wichmann (Intel)  mwichmann

Posted Agenda:

  - Database status, part 3: new stuff.

  - Issues with Pango uplift.

New business:

Meeting opens at 11:00 with:

Uplift, and pango continue to dominate the week

Stew: a couple done so far, but header includes are of a form 
that is confusing devchk (devchk is finding system headers in 
deference to the desired pango headers).  The solution for 
this and yet to maintain backward LSB version conpatability is 
not clear yet.  Jeff:  we were trying to do things 'right' 
from a standpoint of following the upstream's layout, but this 
results in the headers 'looking different'.  Robert points out 
that this is effectively changing the specification 
retrospectively to split headers out to the 'real world' 
effective layouts.

Going forward, Stew was of the approach to follow upstream 
more closely than prior LSB implementations did.  Now that he 
is into it, he is less enthusiastic at re-arranging the 
headers.  Jeff floats the idea of doing the change for LSB 5 
and later, but to not back-push the specification change into 
earlier versions.

Jeff, Robert: Looking at data, to see if the problem only 
exists in Navigator, rather than formally in a specification, 
would be useful.  A quick review indicates this may be the 
case generally, BUT see:


and in a released spec:


Takeaway: do not do reorganizations of prior released 
specification matter;  in LSB 5.0 and following, leave 
approach to Stew with a  slight preference for keeping old 
header layout

Jeff: Procedural:  19 Dec meeting will be conducted; 26 Dec 
and 2 Jan meetings will be skipped, so next meeting after next 
week will be 9 Jan.

Call ends at local Noon

Weekly Bug triage:
The bug tracker is at: https://bugs.linuxbase.org/
irc-only #lsb-meeting at freenode.net
Thurs at 10:00 Eastern
Bugzilla stats as of 11 Dec: 518 open, 521 open last week
518 assigned, 0 new
New last 90 days: 61, last 30: 8; closed last 90: 35, last 30: 
Changed this week: 2, last week: 12
Bugs that are assigned but have no milestone: 227
Rollup bugs: 20

last week's bug triage minutes:


Next meeting:
12 Dec 2012 11:00 to noon, US ET

gobby unofficial minutes are open for edit for at least 15 min 
after each call, and then issued into the mailing list

This document: LSB minutes 20121212.txt

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list