[lsb-discuss] Thoughts on LSB ISO standard
Wichmann, Mats D
mats.d.wichmann at intel.com
Thu Jul 26 13:45:59 UTC 2012
>> 2. We could take LSB as a project in SC22. This is how it is done by eg.
>> POSIX, C and C++. We need either to have a Working Group in SC22, or
>> some representatives from SC22 to LSB, as SC22 also do it for POSIX.
> I was not aware that SC22 still has a POSIX WG? With the Austin Group
> doing such a good job I thought that the POSIX WG was effectively disbanded.
> I would support option #2 to create an LSB WG within SC22. This
> might spur other members of SC22 to become involved in helping the LSB
> through the ISO process.
I think we'd be better off, if it could be pulled off, using the POSIX
(Austin Group) model, which, like Keld, I'm well acquainted with -
I've been some level of participant for many years, although not
particularly active. This would mean ISO representatives working within
the LSB workgroup to make sure "LSB revisions" are also "ISO revisions".
There's already at least the two of you around now :)
I don't believe ANSI/INCITS has any particular interest here, although for a
while they did (there was an INCITS PL22.23 which was assigned
all USA Linux and POSIX projects and standards before being decommissioned
due to lack of activity)
Anyway, I don't think we'd be well served with separate groups working on
LSB, as small as the current maintainer community is... yes, I
know this means there's a chance of "conflict" if different parts of
the group want to focus on different activities but that should be
More information about the lsb-discuss