[lsb-discuss] In the "new" world

Robert Schweikert rjschwei at suse.com
Mon Mar 31 21:26:03 UTC 2014


I know this is reaching a bit as we have not published the meeting 
minutes from the f2f last week. I did post a high level summary to the 
wiki (https://wiki.linuxfoundation.org/en/LSB_Plenary_2014#Meeting_Minutes)

Things we didn't get around to discuss in more detail but that need some 
thought is the documentation/specification of existing stuff.

For example I don't think we want to create a problem statement and a 
solution etc. for every interface that is in the LSB today. If we did 
that we'd just recreate the specification in a different form. I do not 
consider that worth our while. On the other hand we have all these tests 
that could definitely be valuable to distributions and upstream. Thus, 
in these cases I was thinking that we could potentially invent a 
mechanized way to pull out the tet stuff and create stand alone tests. 
We could then just add these stand alone tests to the repo. This I think 
is a worthwhile exercise if we can script it.

A second example is distribution identification, i.e. 
http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os-release.html, this 
AFAIK is currently not in the standard but is

a.) relatively simple to sum up in a problem statement and a solution 
plus test


b.) should not be very controversial

On the other hand it is already on freedesktop.org. Thus, the question 
here is, should we poke at low hanging fruit such as this? Should we 
even bother with stuff that is already "documented and standardized" 
elsewhere? At the f2f we heard from Marcus that having the xdg-utils in 
the LSB is really handy.

Low hanging fruit such as the OS identification may be good point to 
start discussions on mailing lists and vet the new process. Additionally 
this should be something where we get easy agreement and thus put 
ourselves back into the cautiousness of distro and other developers.



P.S. I know LSB 5.0 is top priority and we are trying to get that out 
the door and everyone is busy. Trying to ride the momentu we have from 
the f2f for a bit ;)

Robert Schweikert                           MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
SUSE-IBM Software Integration Center                   LINUX
Tech Lead
Public Cloud Architect
rjschwei at suse.com
rschweik at ca.ibm.com

More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list