On May 18, 2010, at 12:27 PM, Denid Washington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> You might remember me - I'm the one who wrote a sketchy implementation of the
> then-discussed "Berlin Packaging API" about two years ago [1]. I have shifted
> my focus to other things since then, but since recently have more time again
> and my interest on the topic has been sparked again.
>
Certainly I remember you.
> Now I am trying to gather what has happened since then. If I haven't missed
> anything, there was not that much to be missed. The packaging list archives
> seem to be effectively dead. The only thing I found was thoughts about
> uplifting to RPMv4 sprinkled around some LSB Wiki pages, for instance the LSB
> 4.1 Project Plan [2].
>
Yep. Nothing whatsoever to be missed. The last dialogue I was involved in was
(~12/2008):
Q: What is the _ONE_ most important item for the LSB 4+ packaging
standard?
A: Establishing a "standard" version comparison so that "newer" and
"upgrade" are well defined.
Nothing heard (by me) since.
> Now, because I remembered you, Jeff Johnson, to be very constructive, honest
> and generally helpful in criticizing my proposal (and always entertaining)
> and were very much involved in the whole discussion, I would like to ask you:
> what is the state of discussion regarding LSB packaging? Do you know about
> any progress on this front since, say, the end of 2008? Any hints would be
> very valuable for me, as I am seriously thinking about a second (maybe more
> coordinated, complete and consensus-reaching) attempt at working on a new LSB
> packaging proposal..
>
LSB packaging is as extinct as the Dodo AFAIK.
(aside)
You might want to look at http://mancoosi.org which is closest
(but "research" not "standard", standards are much harder) to
evolving something better for software packaging. E.g. the Mancoosi
WP5 is sponsoring a SAT depsolver competition this summer that should
lead to interesting implementations.
There's also http://nixos.org which is attempting "functional" packaging
that avoids many of the snarly issues presented by "standard" packaging.
I'm still willing to help however I can with LSB+RPM. Its _INSANE_ to continue
futile "Packaging War" battles and and no users benefit (but certainly
distros/vendors benefit from de facto monopolies through customer
lock-in using software packaging).
73 de Jeff
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
LSB Communication List rpm-lsb@rpm5.org
