On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 10:11:03AM +0000, Dallman, John wrote: > Mats wrote: > > > I understand the benefits in general of such a staged plan, but what > > remains of the core team is concerned > > that the current state of LSB is enough out of date (and out of use: there > > was only very minimal uptake of > > LSB 5.0 in industry, while the now 8-year-old 4.1 was far more popular) > > that it's maybe not in a state that > > makes it a good candidate for ISO standardization. > > > LSB is at a point now where it can either be left to decline, or > re-vitalized. The latter requires the Linux Foundation to either see it as a > priority, or transfer the project to someone with money and energy to push it > forwards.
How much money is needed? and for what purpose? Can we make a revised low budget lsb with a good chance in the market? the new ISO SC22/WG24 Linux WG has attracted quite a few experts, many from the California area, but I dont know their level of expertise, nor the overlap with the LF LSB WG, so maybe we can put together a team for a revision, on a low budget. But if they are unexperienced with the work it may be problematic... Keld _______________________________________________ lsb-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss
