[NTLUG:Discuss] AN APOLOGY to NTLUG...

[Robert Pearson]

On 1/3/06, Terry <trryhend at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 1/3/06, David Mandala <davidm at them.com> wrote:
> > I was involved in the early efforts to have a single community
> > standard. A single community standard would have been far more valuable
> > to the Linux communitly in general.
> > ...[snip]...
> > To not recognise these issues when talking about RedHat is to do a
> > disservice to certifications and to the LSB standard efforts.

> Just because RedHat has found a business plan that is lucrative is not
> something we should not hold against them and I for one applaud them.
> ...[snip]...

In the "Best of all Possible Worlds" there would be a community standard,
which could vary from community to community, with "specialization"
extensions for specific Communities of Interest (COI). Like Redhat or
possible SuSE or others.
We didn't get this with Windows because Microsoft chose the closed,
proprietary business model. Many companies choose this model.
They feel it gives them a competitive advantage.

Having given the premise the objective is "How do we deliver the
community based Linux standard?". One way to do this currently is
through the Linux User Groups (like NTLUG) in co-operation with
vendors, and others, who are supporting Open Source initiatives.

An "and others" key working relationship would be with recognized,
established, local educational facilities that support Open Source
initiatives.
For example, San Antonio College (SAC)
<<http://www.accd.edu/sac/sacmain/sac.htm>>
supports "Linux from Scratch (LFS)" at
<<http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/>>
and SATLUG (San Antonio Linux Users Group)

How many people support "Linux from Scratch (LFS)"?
Is LFS a good standard to start with and base anything from?