[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       osdl-lsb-discuss
Subject:    Re: [lsb-discuss] Qt 4 decision
From:       Olaf Schmidt <ojschmidt () kde ! org>
Date:       2007-09-06 11:49:16
Message-ID: 200709061349.18251.ojschmidt () kde ! org
[Download RAW message or body]

[ Robert Schweikert, Mi., 5. Sep. 2007 ]
> My main concern is that we re-create "the RHEL 3 problem". Once we push
> Qt4 to mandatory and obsolete the current version we will cut RHEL 4 as
> a target for ISVs that must certify to LSB 3.2 due to other reasons.

Of course the exact same argument can be applied to all changes in LSB 3.2. It 
will always be possible to find a distribution version that we cut off by 
making a change.

ISVs will still be able to state "RHEL>=3 or LSB>=3.2" as requirements, so I 
do not see this as a big issue.

> I realize we need to move forward in some way, but think we should take 
> this opportunity to define a set of rules we can fall back on when we 
> come to this or similar juncture again in the future.

The set of rules we agreed on last year is that we release future ABI in 
non-mandatory modules, so that ISVs and distributions know in advance where 
we are heading. For example, by publishing Qt4 as a non-mandatory "future 
ABI" module, we declared Qt4 to be safe to use by ISVs targeting future 
versions of the LSB. We would show ourselves as unreliable and untrustworthy 
if we suddenly decided to abandon this published roadmap.

Olaf
_______________________________________________
lsb-discuss mailing list
lsb-discuss@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lsb-discuss
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]