[lsb-discuss] ISO LSB standard

[keld at keldix.com]

On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 09:44:14AM +0200, Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
> Note that ISO is a bad choice of venue for this because it is so
> incredible hostile to free dissemination of information (which includes
> sharing with committee members who are supposed to make decisions on
> what goes into a standard).  And most working groups are surprisingly
> bad at recording-keeping, so that it is impossible to figure out why a
> change was made just a few years later.

I am a little tired of ISO bashing, but I can understand it, given the history from the LF side
on ISO LSB in 2006. But ISO does respect open source licences, so the trick is to devellop 
the standard under a copyleft license in LF.

I myself have been active in ISO document handling for over 30 years, and still involved in wg14 C and wg21 C++
archives, IMHO something like 30 years of documents are almost all of it completely open. The same goes for posix via
the austin group, and some other work. So C, C++ and posix - which are core specs for LSB - are in a rather good -
 or close to exellent state, IMHO. Not many standards have a 30 year digital online almost fully searchable document store.

How long are the LF records?

keld