Op zondag 22 september 2019 13:41:35 CEST schreef Christian Imhorst:

Hi all,

Am 22. September 2019 13:30:28 MESZ schrieb Christian Boltz :

...

== Board-internal communication channels ==

The board is evaluating open source options to replace hangouts and the

whatsapp group.

That's a fantastic idea. Maybe you can checkout Riot.IM/Matrix for WhatsApp and Nextcloud talks for hangouts?

Would like to here more on that and what's the results. :-)

Best regards Christian I've been investigating this, and both Matrix and Nextcloud work nicely up to 4 attendants max. Riot/Matrix use their own for one on one video calls, but jitsi for conference calls, tested that and it's horrible, even with 4 people. Nextcloud needs a separate signalling server if you want to go >4 attendants, and the Talk app on phones only does the video calls/conferencing, not the rest of the options ( chat, connecting to projects/docs etc ). The only FOSS thing I haven't tested yet is Mattermost.

-- Gertjan Lettink a.k.a. Knurpht openSUSE Board Member openSUSE Forums Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hi Gertjan, On 10/15/19 9:39 PM, Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

The only FOSS thing I haven't tested yet is Mattermost.

I use Mattermost. It's good for chat, tracking conversations and sending file attachments. It relies on third-parties [1] for video & screen sharing though. Regards, Ish Sookun [1] https://docs.mattermost.com/deployment/video-and-audio-calling.html -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Op dinsdag 15 oktober 2019 20:26:26 CEST schreef Adam Spiers:

Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

...

I've been investigating this, and both Matrix and Nextcloud work nicely up to 4 attendants max. Riot/Matrix use their own for one on one video calls, but jitsi for conference calls, tested that and it's horrible, even with 4 people. What was horrible about it? I had only good experiences with Jitsi calls so far. Bad video quality, people getting kicked out. This was on a free jitsi instance though. Same for riot/matrix jitsi instance

-- Gertjan Lettink a.k.a. Knurpht openSUSE Board Member openSUSE Forums Team -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Mathias Homann wrote:

Am Dienstag, 15. Oktober 2019, 19:39:57 CEST schrieb Knurpht-openSUSE:

...

Op zondag 22 september 2019 13:41:35 CEST schreef Christian Imhorst:

...

Am 22. September 2019 13:30:28 MESZ schrieb Christian Boltz :

...

== Board-internal communication channels ==

The board is evaluating open source options to replace hangouts and the whatsapp group.

...what about ... IRC?

I mean seriously, every opensuse member already has (can have) a registered nick on freenode that already identifies him as whatever his/her login on opensuse.org is, a channel can be quickly created and made private (password protected), channels can be moderated, etc etc etc. Why do we need a "new" wheel when the old one is still round and rolling fine?

Let's be realistic; IRC is more like an octagon than a smooth wheel. Yes it rolls just like it always did, but it's lacking some significant features and ease of use which all other modern chat systems have, and which have propelled those systems to far wider adoption than IRC ever achieved. Having used it for ~20 years, I'm just as fond of IRC as anyone, but nostalgia is not a good reason to avoid moving forwards. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Gerald Pfeifer hat am 15. Oktober 2019 um 21:03 geschrieben:

On Tue 2019-10-15, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

...what about ... IRC?

A primary usecase for us is video conferencing. ;-)

Does it have to be *video* or would audio suffice? I've really good experiences with Mumble (a FLOSS Teamspeak alternative) on board and committee meetings in the past. Regards, vinz. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 9/23/19 10:06 PM, Adam Spiers wrote:

Michal Kubecek wrote:

...

On Sunday, 22 September 2019 13:30 Christian Boltz wrote:

...

Simon will write an introduction letter listing pros and cons. Options will be "keep openSUSE" vs. "change the name", but we won't propose alternative names. If the result is "change", we'll have a second vote for the new name.

This sounds a lot like "Let's vote if we want to leave EU first and leave figuring out what it actually means for later (and hope we won't have to)."

That was my initial reaction too, but after thinking about it for a few more seconds, I realised there's hardly any similarity.

Well the push to change name has mostly come from the community rather then anyone on the board. However there is no point in creating a foundation under the "openSUSE" name if the majority of the community would rather a different name, hence we are dealing with this issue now. We have suggested to those who think it would be a good idea to change the name that the idea might be more popular if they have some good alternatives. For reference the current discussion of alternatives is in this github issue https://github.com/openSUSE/branding/issues/112 -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed 2019-10-02, Michal Kubecek wrote:

Personally, I can see more similarities [with the Brexit vote] than I feel comfortable with.

When the topic came up on my first board meeting (in August), the Brexit voting process is an example I used as something to not repeat, indeed. I, too, feel a bit uncomfortable, and I, too, hope that the vote will be "no change of name". I see your point, and Henne's, and at least as importantly the value of an existing brand. To me the potential benefits of changing thename appear moderate in comparison, if not speculative. But let's see.

Of course, there is another difference: if it all comes to the worst and the result of the vote is "change", Board could simply make a popularity contest and choose the name with most votes even if majority of voters (and users) would in fact dislike that name. But that is hardly reassuring...

If it comes to that, constructing the ballot is going to be non-trivial and hugely important. Gerald -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hi, On 10/2/19 7:37 AM, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:

On Wed 2019-10-02, Michal Kubecek wrote:

...

Personally, I can see more similarities [with the Brexit vote] than I feel comfortable with.

When the topic came up on my first board meeting (in August), the Brexit voting process is an example I used as something to not repeat, indeed.

I, too, feel a bit uncomfortable, and I, too, hope that the vote will be "no change of name". I see your point, and Henne's, and at least as importantly the value of an existing brand. To me the potential benefits of changing thename appear moderate in comparison, if not speculative. But let's see.

...

Of course, there is another difference: if it all comes to the worst and the result of the vote is "change", Board could simply make a popularity contest and choose the name with most votes even if majority of voters (and users) would in fact dislike that name. But that is hardly reassuring...

If it comes to that, constructing the ballot is going to be non-trivial and hugely important.

Yes, especially since we continue to co-mingle different tangentially related topics. We continue to mix foundation name, project name, and "product name" where "product name" is probably the least defined up in the same conversation. Foundation name: There is no objective data that shows that foundation_name not in [ project_name, product_name ] is really bad for collecting money from sponsors. And collecting money from sponsors is what the foundation is supposed to be about, if I remember the discussion around this in the oSC YouTube video correctly. The bottom line appears to me to provide a legal entity so we can get money from sponsors and the money does not have to traverse through the SUSE accounting system. Project name: While the use of "openSUSE Project" has trademark implications, as such we have been able to use the name for a long time and while IANAL I would haphazard the guess that SUSE has long lost the opportunity to strip the openSUSE name in this respect as to lack of prior enforcement. Product name: If we define our products to be the distributions then we have "openSUSE Leap" and "openSUSE Tumbleweed". In this case the life span of these names is relatively short, thus if "the lack of enforcement" would apply to he product and SUSE could force the re-naming of these products is a question others will have to answer. Trademarks: This is even farther removed w.r.t. the naming question and revolves around trademark use approval and the work the board has w.r.t. this topic. This is where the trademark ownership topic comes into play most prominently. This is also all about marketing and being known. Which is where the project has traditionally lacked the most w.r.t. people extending effort. Each of these topics is quite complex with potential implications on the others. None of the the topics, probably with the exception of the trademark ownership, have been discussed in a focused discussion with more or less objective weighing of the pros and cons. And now for some reason there appears to be the believe that we can cast these complex topics into a single yes/no ballot question. Sorry, IMHO that does not do the complexity of the topic justice nor should we, IMHO, expect any tangible useful information out of that vote. Or stated in another way, having one yes/no vote that intermingles these complex topics is insane. Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU Distinguished Architect LINUX Technical Team Lead Public Cloud rjschwei@suse.com IRC: robjo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Robert Schweikert wrote:

We continue to mix foundation name, project name, and "product name" where "product name" is probably the least defined up in the same conversation.

[snipped]

Each of these topics is quite complex with potential implications on the others. None of the the topics, probably with the exception of the trademark ownership, have been discussed in a focused discussion with more or less objective weighing of the pros and cons. And now for some reason there appears to be the believe that we can cast these complex topics into a single yes/no ballot question. Sorry, IMHO that does not do the complexity of the topic justice nor should we, IMHO, expect any tangible useful information out of that vote.

Or stated in another way, having one yes/no vote that intermingles these complex topics is insane.

Exactly, especially when the voting page offers zero useful guidance about how to make a decision in an informed way. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org