On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 11:44 AM, Bryen M Yunashko
On Wed, 2012-06-13 at 20:33 +0200, Jos Poortvliet wrote:
I'm entirely on the same page with you.
A 1 year release schedule and using OBS and Tumbleweed to satisfy the needs for those needing more up-to-date software seems perfect to me.
Let's be honest - if you want the latest, 6, 8 or 12 months - it's all too slow so you use Tumbleweed anyway. If you want stable, 12 months is better than 8 is better than 6. Simple.
if it happens to help our release engineering, awesome too ;-)
All very logical and I support it as well from a practical standpoint as a user.
The downside of this, however, is less marketing noise. We'll only promote the release once a year instead of up to 2 times a year. We'll slip on Distrowatch (for those that care, I don't care about Distrowatch.) And while marketing may not be an issue of interest in this particular list, less noise does create less attraction to future potential contributors and developers.
Not saying that's a reason we shouldn't reconsider changing our gameplan. Just putting it out there that it will be one area definitely affected (for good or bad.)
Bryen
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Marketing is about budgets and key performance indicators and strategy, not about release cycles. Debian, CentOS and Ubuntu still rule the roost in community distros for servers and I'm not sure what the breakdowns are for supported corporate servers between RHEL, SLES, Oracle and Canonical. I don't think Linux desktops are even two percent of the total desktop / laptop market - Windows and Mac are the only significant ones there. My blog is open-source oriented and most of my traffic comes from Windows and Macs running Firefox and Chrome and iPads and iPhones running "Safari" - Linux, Internet Explorer and Android are irrelevant. And I don't think there are a lot of Fedora or openSUSE servers. My own use case is highly unusual - the best description would be "scientific workstation". I've run Windows 2000 - XP - Vista - 7 dual-booted with Red Hat 6.2 / 7 / 8 / 9 / Debian / Gentoo / openSUSE for the past 12 years and never looked back. But in any case I'm hardly representative of a strategic market segment like servers. I think openSUSE would do better in the markets that actually matter - servers - if we had solid Infrastructure as a Service and Platform as a Service offerings. We *do* have B1 Systems' OpenStack Essex in the OBS repos, but I think the documentation is still German only and only people like me who track that stuff have even heard of B1 Systems. We don't have an open source Platform as a Service like VMware's Cloud Foundry or Red Hat's OpenShift Origin. Neither of those appears to be difficult to port to openSUSE, although I think OpenShift's Fedora 16 / RHEL 6 RPMs are less work than CloudFoundry's Ubuntu 10.04 .debs. But I think we should have our own, leveraging off of WebYast, SUSE Studio and OBS. -- Twitter: http://twitter.com/znmeb Computational Journalism Server http://j.mp/compjournoserver Data is the new coal - abundant, dirty and difficult to mine. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org