Posts Tagged ‘FHS’

FHS 3.0: First draft published


The Linux Foundation has just announced the release of its first draft for FHS 3.0 and expect comments from the community. Time to speak !

And of course, I couldn’t resist making again comments 😉

Proposition of Cross-Distro Mini-Conf for 2012


Time has come again to think to our friends down under ! Since I was there in 2007 for a MondoRescue conference I think this is really a place to be in the FLOSS ecosystem when possible; Too bad it’s so far away from France 😦 Travel costs are not light either.

But I thought I should propose the follwoing mini-conf, as the one I attended in Fosdem 2010 on the same topic worked very interesting, and allowed to start some joint collaboration that I think is fruitful and avoid/reduce fragmentation.

I hope it will be accepted to give me an opportunity to fly there and meet with the great community which gathers there each year.

So here it is (Thanks to the great example provided by Martin Michlmayr last year)

The “Cross-Distribution” mini-conf at LCA 2012 (Ballarat, Australia; January 16-20 2012) is for people interested in cooperation between Open Source distributions. Topics include contributors agreements, licensing policies, packaging best practices and tools, sharing patches to upstream projects, communications, working with upstream Open Source developers, translations, governance, workflow in place, version control systems, bug reporting management and sharing,, funding, marketing, lessons from your experience, and whatever related topics people would like to bring up. Whether you are a single contributor working on a single package, or leading a full distribution, managing a full distribution infrastructure, or representing it in the press, whether it’s famous as Debian or less as AbulEdu this mini-conf hopes to bring different people together to exchange thoughts and facilitate discussion about these topics.

Presentation submitters should feel free to suggest their own topics. Here is a list of potentially interesting subjects (in no particular order):

* Building software packages on a large scale
* Choosing valid licenses and copyright policies
* Patch management
* Working with upstream
* Forking a distribution
* Experiences in distributed development
* Managing bug report and enhancement request
* Tools to support making a distribution
* Translation of a distribution
* Reuse between distributions
* Collaborationbetween distributions
* Distribution structures
* Distribution Development Management and Governance
* Distribution Corporate Governance
* Lessons learned in building up your distribution
* Marketing
* Communication
* Copyrights
* Applying your copyright and license choices

We hope to receive proposals for:

* 50 minute expert panel discussions
* 50 minute full presentations
* 25 minute half presentations
* 5-10 minute lightning talks (e.g. success stories, …)

To submit a proposal, please contact Bruno Cornec at and include the following information:

* Your name
* Brief bio noting any previous speaking experience
* Talk title
* Brief outline of your proposed talk
* Notes of any special equipment / facilities you may require

FLOSS needs more standards


Following Fosdem 2010, I’m more and more convinced that in order for our community to progress more rapidly and deeply, we need some more standards to build upon.

I’ve participated to an excellent talk around the joint translation effort of packages cross-distributions, and we clearly need more initiatives like that.

A first one I’m thinking of is a Changelog format standard. The FSF is pretty evasive on it, and many major FLOSS programs have completely different format. I think we now have the sufficient maturity to delegate to the Linux Foundation the realization of a ChangeLog format standard that will contain all the info needed and able to be processed automatically. We need at least for each modification the version, the date and the authors, maybe a tag/id, then lines describing what has been done. I’m sure some other clever people will find more useful info to add, but that should not make 20 pages of specifications. And after that it’s defined, every GNU program could adopt it, as well as the Linux kernel, Apache projects, … and that would help a lot in order of automatic processing of them (for creating some content in packages, to rewrite svn2cl, cvs2cl and create git2cl, hg2cl which would then be more obvious).

Of course, we should also work at improving the LSB and its FHS. Too many packages today place tools in different places for no good reason IMO. Again maturity is high enough to standardize all those places, making cross-distribution work much easier, as well as ISVs work ! Why would partprobe be in /bin on one distro and /usr/sbin on another 😦

There are sufficient reasons to have differences. And we all like that. But we shouldn’t create artifical ones ! So each time it’s possible, we should group and remove all those useless differences which do not bring added value, but create more hassle to deal with Linux. Using the mailing list is a very good start which should be encouraged.