Minutes Jul 6 2011

From The Linux Foundation
Jump to: navigation, search


Mats Wichmann (Intel), Stew Benedict (LF), Jeff Licquia (LF), Russ Herrold (CentOS), Robert Schweikert (Suse), Alan Clark (Suse)


  • LSB 5.0: what to actually do?
  • FHS status.


Jeff: Been doing some work on FHS. Been trying to get some of the patches in, hoped to get a draft out, but hasn't happened yet. Still a number of things that have to go in before a draft.
Jeff: LSB 5.0. Still have to talk about a few of the X libraries. Don't know that much new has been going on with regards to the APIs. Comments?
Mats: We're probably out of sync with what some people expect, but direct usage of X interfaces isn't so popular now either. Probably less demand than the other libraries we've talked about.
Jeff: current list for uplifts (disregarding time and resources) - glibc, libstdc++, libgcc_s, GTK, Qt, libGL
Jeff: What do we want to add to LSB-5.0? GTK3, Python3 are 2 we've discussed. We've talked of deprecating GTK2 and add GTK3. Not so clear with Python. Comments?
Robert: deprecate both GTK2 and Python2 and add 3.
Jeff: The GTK move is clear to me, the community is active in moving to GTK3. Python on the other hand is less clear.
Mats: The hard work is adding python3, we can wait until freeze to decide which is the default
Jeff: 2 other possible adds are dbus and SANE
Robert: dbus should go in, SANE needs support from the printing workgroup to do the work
Jeff: So those 2 go on, dbus high priority, SANE less so.
Jeff: So we have a basic task list then, with the uplifts, adds, modularization, sdk work

Some discussion of the task list at http://www.linuxfoundation.org/en/ProjectPlan50

Jeff: Fixing the RPM spec could be something from the above list to be considered for LSB-5.0
Robert: perhaps that and libxslt

Some discussion on the RPM spec. Doesn't seem to be causing a problem for our target audience.
Jeff: should address our pain points in our use of RPM.