On Fri, Jul 30, 2004 at 03:25:48PM -0400, Owen Taylor wrote: > To clarify, the "standarization process" referred to here is a proposal > to have "specifications releases" every 6 months to force > us to actually finish and publish the specifications that are > done (XDG basedir specification, desktop file specification, > startup notification, and so forth.) > > While it was initially proposed that specifications would be part of the > platform release, I think this is a bad idea for a number of reasons: > > - A specification is about multiple applications inter-operating; > so the criteria for compatibility and being "done" are very different > than for a library. > > - The end-product is different - the platform release produces a set > of tarballs, the specification release produces a list of > specification. > > - The platform release is going to be enough work without throwing > in a bunch of unrelated tasks that don't *have* to be part of the > platform release. > > So I don't see any duplication, much less massive duplication between > the specification and platform releases. They will be coordinated > as appropriate, they don't need to be the same. Personally, I'm torn. One proposal is that they are all part of the platform, but the platform is split in two: libraries, and specifications. Distributors who want to be platform-compliant must ship all the libraries in sufficient version, and software must comply to all the standards relevant to it in order for the product to be platform-compliant. Another proposal is that you just combine it all. The other proposal is that you split the lot in two, and have not-necessarily-connected releases. Obviously, I put the split platform first for a reason: I like it the best. -- Daniel Stone <daniel freedesktop org> freedesktop.org: powering your desktop http://www.freedesktop.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature