Jeff Licquia (LF), Alan Clark (Suse), Robert Schweikert (Suse), Stew Benedict (LF), Russ Herrold (Owl River)
Jeff: Updates: SDK is built and present on the ftp server. Some issues with the repo generation. Possibly something with the recent addition of yum groups.
Jeff: Once I have a working repo, that will get installed and move to old stuff to archive
Jeff: For the 4.0 refresh, we may need to go back over what's built and make sure any recent pushes have been picked up.
Jeff: Issue with snapshot repos picking up staging was due to a directory naming issue, corrected
Jeff: Revival of FHS. Announcement went out last week. Traffic on the mailing list, people commenting, adding patches to bugs. Mats converted the source to docbook-xml. Some issues with pdf generation(page breaks, etc.)
Russ: Thought I saw an announcement that html5 had some sort of pagebreak tag
Jeff: Could be, htmldoc we use probably doesn't support it. If we could get pagebreaks in htmltopdf would probably work for us. Need to do some research.
Alan: You mentioned a mailing list. Is this the LSB list?
Jeff: New (restarted) list fhs-discuss. Lots of traffic, lots of ideas being discussed. Talk of deprecating the "games" hierarchy. Talk of reworking the home directory structure (dot files). Proposal to get rid of /usr, which seems a little premature.
Russ: That's on Red Hat's roadmap
Jeff: Perhaps I need to pay more attention to this proposal then
Russ: Red Hat wants to flatten the partitioning structure, simplify things into one big LVM
Jeff: The idea is that /usr becomes a symlink. If Debian and Red Hat ae both moving to this model, maybe we only need to find out what the Suse folks think.
Russ: FHS is bigger than Linux
Robert: Don't know of any moves in that direction with Suse. We need to find out about the other 'nix systems, whether they are interested in FHS
Jeff: Inquiries I've made seem to indicate that the other OS's are not interested in FHS
Jeff: BSD folks had some detailed critiques of where FHS does not fit their model at all, which tends to indicate they haven't been following
Jeff: So it seems the FHS seems to be explicitly a Linux standard and should become so in 3.0
Robert: So why not just roll it into LSB?
Jeff: We could, I'd like to establish some credibility first
Alan: So why don't the BSD folks like it? Were mistakes made?
Jeff: Yes, some things in FHS they say are completely wrong
Alan: So should we fix FHS so BSD would embrace it?
Jeff: Offered to make fixes. Offered to move it from LF governing. Still seemed to be some resistance
Alan: Can I ask a higher level question? What's the process of working through the proposals and accepting/rejecting/implementing them?
Jeff: I have one in my head, haven't published anything yet. Right now, a lot of the activity is uncontroversial stuff, that is what's been done so far. I want to make sure any major change gets a good airing on the mail list and bug list. At some point want to have a big bug triage, on irc or whatever and decide on those as a group. Propose a draft and send it around.
Jeff: In terms of who makes the final decisions, I think I'll reserve that for myself and long time members of the LSB
Russ: Long time voting members of the LSB are members of the community distros. Might have the charter discussion first and make sure the community distributions have a seat at the table.
Jeff: I agree. The largest community distros are what feed into the enterprise distros, as well as the other community distros.
Russ: I'm involved in some other special purpose distros and am interested in these things
Jeff: Best thing to do is signup for the list and participate. Things are informal now. Given the timeline to release a new version that's probably OK for now.
Russ: Why hurry?
Jeff: Because distros are doing things on their own and we need to refresh
Russ: I think we need the charter first and not hurry
Alan: We need the get buy in from the distros
Jeff: Maybe we need to work harder to get the distros to pay attention
Alan: I just don't want to release a draft and have the distros come back and say we didn't inform them
Russ: Maybe an article in LWN would get people's attention
Jeff: Just so I understand, publicizing the charter discussion is something we need to focus on?
Russ: I think so
Alan: I think we need to give people an idea of the scope of the changes being planned.
Jeff: I think some of the changes are somewhat big. The /run change is one.
Alan: So you talk about the impact of /run, at a higher level, to gauge the scope, not the details
Jeff: I've been pushing things the way I have, because I think FHS is on the cusp of becoming irrelevant, but I think there's still some respect for FHS
Some discussion on the old/new mailing lists, wikipedia page, media articles.
End Of Call