On Mo, Mär 14 2022 at 14:16:53 +0100, Richard Brown wrote:

I'd rather see this project focus on actual relevant real world issues, such as:

- encoraging more contributors to actually contribute to our codebases, - improving the polish of our distributions, especially when it comes to the increasingly relevant cloud & edge use cases - having openSUSE better reflect the diversity of relevant use cases of Linux (server, edge, cloud, embedded...and desktop) rather than it's current over-emphasis of desktop often at the expense of others

It's not like the desktop is openSUSE distros' strength anyway, so I'm not exactly sure where that perceived over-emphasis comes from. LCP [Sasi] https://lcp.world/

On Mo, Mär 14 2022 at 15:30:52 +0100, Richard Brown wrote:

Maybe the laptop being the only computer you can see on www.opensuse.org?

Maybe because the Tumbleweed description mentions desktops and office applications but no obvious server/cloud/edge/embedded use cases? (Samba and git straddle multiple realms).

Maybe because the Leap description only mentions 'pick your desktop...'

Maybe because news articles like https://news.opensuse.org/2022/03/02/leap-reaches-beta-build-phase/ emphasise Plasma, GNOME, Enlightenment, but don't mention a single use case besides desktop, and asks users to test it on " on multiple laptops, workstations and other hardware devices"

Conciously or not, I'd say openSUSE has a desktop bias problem that it needs to address, especially when it comes to how we talk about ourselves.

I hope you will be glad to learn I'm trying my best to make both get-o-o and www-o-o (which has been in the works for 3 years and isn't really expected to be finished anytime soon) appeal to a wider set of audiences than just desktop users (while also making it easier for the specific audiences to find their way around the project). The thing that stops me the most is that I'm not a copy writer and I can't come up with good text to market everything about the projects and its output well at all, I got plenty of help from others in this area already, and so things are moving at a faster pace, but this seems to be a general issue with our websites, text is kind of a mess and people don't understand things we try to communicate. Finding out anything about the project, the distros is a matter of asking a lot of questions to the community on communication platforms instead it seems, which we are frankly happy to answer, but not everyone will ask before they just give up after trying to look it up for themselves. Also Richard, I hope I don't have to state the obvious, but I did not see any bug reports/issues on the subject of the websites targeting desktop more. I really wish I could read y'alls' minds, so I knew how to please you in what our messaging on the core websites is, but I can't do it no matter how hard I try. LCP [Sasi] https://lcp.world/

On 3/15/22 00:52, Sasi Olin wrote:

On Mo, Mär 14 2022 at 14:16:53 +0100, Richard Brown wrote:

...

I'd rather see this project focus on actual relevant real world issues, such as:

- encoraging more contributors to actually contribute to our codebases, - improving the polish of our distributions, especially when it comes to the increasingly relevant cloud & edge use cases - having openSUSE better reflect the diversity of relevant use cases of Linux (server, edge, cloud, embedded...and desktop) rather than it's current over-emphasis of desktop often at the expense of others

It's not like the desktop is openSUSE distros' strength anyway, so I'm not exactly sure where that perceived over-emphasis comes from.

The number of distro's that are easyish for new users and ship a range of desktops is pretty small so it makes sense that openSUSE is recognized as one of the better desktop distro's because really it is (That doesn't mean there isn't more we could do much better). Personally I think we undersell ourself as a distro for new Linux users, especially with "The makers' choice for sysadmins, developers and desktop users." I think this speaks far more to experienced users when in Reality the installer and Yast combined make openSUSE one of the easiest distros for new Linux users. On the original question i'm not going to say what board members should or shouldn't work on in there own time thats up to them. But as a project i'd be uncomfortable signing up to such a statement. Maybe because in a past life I worked for a manufacturing company so I understand more choices mean significantly larger costs such as QA, warehousing more complex production processes all of which for choices that likely won't make that money back and would therefore impose a cost that would be passed onto all customers making things more expensive for everyone. In reality the only way you could do something like this and actually have it work is not by requiring Vendors to "offer a choice" but rather a model where consumers could hand there OEM keys back to Microsoft and get a rebate in return. Like Richard I don't really think this sort of political activism is the current role of the openSUSE project but I think its a good thing that we support organizations such as FSFE who's roll it is to look at such things. I'd also be happy if a vote of members found that we should adjust our role / vision to include such things. Cheers -- 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

On 3/17/22 06:56, Axel Braun wrote:

Hello Simon,

...

On the original question i'm not going to say what board members should or shouldn't work on in there own time thats up to them. But as a project i'd be uncomfortable signing up to such a statement.

If you feel we need a vote on this, please mention this clearly.

Sure let me elaborate further, I don't think we should have a vote on this specific issue because that would set the precedence that we should do such for every issue. But before we sign such a thing as the project I believe we need to agree as a project to the new expanded scope of the project then it will be clear in any case such as this whether we as a project should sign up without needing to put it past members. If you consider the following which we wrote as a part of the charter for our foundation proposal: The openSUSE Foundation is a not for profit organisation that believes in empowering its Contributors so that the user community can benefit from the best, most-sustainable and most-innovative open source software. And from our wiki page: The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE creates one of the world's best Linux distributions, as well as a variety of tools, such as OBS, OpenQA, Kiwi, YaST, OSEM, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community. The project is controlled by its community and relies on the contributions of individuals, working as testers, writers, translators, usability experts, artists and ambassadors or developers. The project embraces a wide variety of technology, people with different levels of expertise, speaking different languages and having different cultural backgrounds. Now compare that to the FSFE's Mission statement: Free Software Foundation Europe is a charity that empowers users to control technology. Software is deeply involved in all aspects of our lives. It is important that this technology empowers rather than restricts us. Free Software gives everybody the rights to use, understand, adapt, and share software. These rights help support other fundamental rights like freedom of speech, freedom of press, and privacy. Free Software Foundation Europe: helps individuals and organisations to understand how Free Software contributes to freedom, transparency, and self-determination. enhances users' rights by abolishing barriers to Free Software adoption. encourages people to use and develop Free Software. provides resources to enable everyone to further promote Free Software in Europe. While you could argue that the statement you'd like the project to sign fits under "The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere" at a stretch this action seems far more consistent with the FSFE's mission so before we go down this path i'd like to see the openSUSE Membership vote to adopt more of the language in the FSFE mission statement into our own to make it clear that this kind of advocacy is a core part of the project.

...

Maybe because in a past life I worked for a manufacturing company so I understand more choices mean significantly larger costs such as QA, warehousing more complex production processes all of which for choices that likely won't make that money back and would therefore impose a cost that would be passed onto all customers making things more expensive for everyone.

We talk about freedom here, and freedom is never for free (as we learn in Europe the hard way...). Coming form manufacturing and Supply Chain myself I would not overrate this. You may buy support for a free system, as you pay a license fee for a proprietary one. In the end it may be a draw.

I don't really think the focus here is Freedom, because the reality is I can buy pretty much any laptop / desktop where the manufacturer only ships Windows and I have complete freedom to install whatever OS I want and it won't impact my warranty etc. So freedom is largely already there on the other hand there are many other devices that have far less freedom and manufacturers that will actively try and block you from installing something else think most iOS and even Android devices gaming handhelds etc so if this really is about freedom why are you focusing on devices that have relative freedom already rather then ones that have none at all.

...

In reality the only way you could do something like this and actually have it work is not by requiring Vendors to "offer a choice" but rather a model where consumers could hand there OEM keys back to Microsoft and get a rebate in return.

That could be a potential second step as well. But it would still help only the educated consumers

I think this comes back to the other fundamental issue I see with this proposal which is if our products were truly good enough they would stand on there own and we wouldn't need government regulation to make it work. I am also concerned that this could easily create a negative image of openSUSE ie rather then openSUSE trying to create products that stand up they are bitter about Microsoft's dominance and are trying to use government regulation instead. Saying it would only help "Educated Customers" is also kinda saying that our marketing efforts to educate people have failed and now were taking the lazy approach of making the government educate people for us.

...

Like Richard I don't really think this sort of political activism is the current role of the openSUSE project but I think its a good thing that we support organizations such as FSFE who's roll it is to look at such things. I'd also be happy if a vote of members found that we should adjust our role / vision to include such things.

Our community members are free to decide where they put emphasis on - those who do, decide.

Yes they certainly are I don't disagree with that, but that is a very different proposition from the project as a whole signing onto something. Ie signing the partition as an openSUSE Project vs Individual members signing it and saying they are openSUSE Members. If you remember back to the FSF partitions last year this is much more like the Project deciding to sign one or the other vs individual members doing so. Its a completely different thing to me say deciding that I think the latest GNU Health should work on Leap so i'm going to sit down and work on getting it working. Just like members are free to work on a partition on a particular topic but the fact that a group of members work on such a thing doesn't mean that the project as a whole should endorse it. -- 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

Hello Gerald, Am Freitag, 18. März 2022, 17:53:57 CET schrieb Gerald Pfeifer:

On Thu 2022-03-17, Simon Lees wrote:

...

I don't really think the focus here is Freedom, because the reality is I can buy pretty much any laptop / desktop where the manufacturer only ships Windows and I have complete freedom to install whatever OS I want

True, but you still would have to pay for Windows.

My current notebook is a CTO model - not specifically made for CTOs 😎, that's the vendors term for "configure your own" - and I could configure hardware options, add software, adjust software, choose languages, just not opt out of getting and paying for Windows which I never used.

I asked the CEO of Lenovo Germany for a Laptop w/o operating system, or as alternative a refund for the unused Windows license. Someone from Lenovo called me and told me that they will not sell a Laptop without Windows, and refused to refund the license. And refused as well to give me that statement in written. I found a way to buy a ThinkPad without Windows, otherwise I would probably use a different brand now (with trackpoint - important!)

So it's not necessarily asking for Linux coming preloaded. I don't need that.

Sure. I consider you an educated user, like all on the mailing list :-)

Just to not have to pay for something else when all I want to use is Linux. Our own Linux, in fact. :-)

If possible, yes Axel

On 3/17/22 09:30, Jim Henderson wrote:

On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 22:57:55 +1030, Simon Lees wrote:

...

Like Richard I don't really think this sort of political activism is the current role of the openSUSE project but I think its a good thing that we support organizations such as FSFE who's roll it is to look at such things. I'd also be happy if a vote of members found that we should adjust our role / vision to include such things.

I think there is an element of open source software that is inherently political - the idea of "free as in freedom, not as in beer" is arguably inherently a political statement.

Maybe, but it doesn't have to be in all the cases where i'm using open source software i'm doing so because its the best tool for the job, similarly there are many places where you can write a business case suggesting it might be the best thing to use. Personally I have no issues choosing to use Proprietary software when I feel it is the right tool for the job which is certainly the case for some of the things I do and at the end of the day thats really what user freedom is the freedom for someone to choose what they feel is the best tool for the job. -- 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

Hello Jim, Am Donnerstag, 17. März 2022, 00:00:52 CET schrieb Jim Henderson:

On Wed, 16 Mar 2022 22:57:55 +1030, Simon Lees wrote:

...

Like Richard I don't really think this sort of political activism is the current role of the openSUSE project but I think its a good thing that we support organizations such as FSFE who's roll it is to look at such things. I'd also be happy if a vote of members found that we should adjust our role / vision to include such things.

I think there is an element of open source software that is inherently political - the idea of "free as in freedom, not as in beer" is arguably inherently a political statement.

This comes up on occasion in the forums, where we specifically discourage political and religious topics - but there are times where some point out that open source is inherently political because it's all about freedom - and that can be a difficult line to navigate at times.

But I also see the point that you and Richard are making about the board's role here. I do think this is something that is bigger than the project, but the project's voice in this matter could be important, so a vote on an adjustment to the role and vision would seem appropriate to me.

I'm open to discuss adjustment of roles, but I feel in this case there is no need to: how are we supposed to advocate for openSUSE Linux if we can't advocate for policy that furthers that goal? The goal is clearly wider than just 'our' distribution, but it should not stop us from taking appropriate action.

One of the real challenges that we face is things like TPM and other such proprietary technologies that restrict user choice in operating system software choices. Championing user choice is something that, to me, would be appropriate for the project to do (whether it's the board doing it or a group of interested members doing it). Something like restricted choice in operating system selection in consumer hardware would seem to me to be a fight (or discussion) worth having.

True. TPM can be the trojan horse to lock free software out, if hardware comes in conjunction with proprietary protocols and systems. One more reason to protect users from preinstalled proprietary systems.... Cheers Axel

On 3/22/22 06:31, Axel Braun wrote:

Hello Jim,

Am Donnerstag, 17. März 2022, 00:00:52 CET schrieb Jim Henderson:

...

One of the real challenges that we face is things like TPM and other such proprietary technologies that restrict user choice in operating system software choices. Championing user choice is something that, to me, would be appropriate for the project to do (whether it's the board doing it or a group of interested members doing it). Something like restricted choice in operating system selection in consumer hardware would seem to me to be a fight (or discussion) worth having.

True. TPM can be the trojan horse to lock free software out, if hardware comes in conjunction with proprietary protocols and systems. One more reason to protect users from preinstalled proprietary systems.... If hardware prevented openSUSE from being installed then i'd see it as a completely different issue and one worth raising, fortunately we aren't in that kind of position at the moment.

-- 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

On Wed, 2022-03-16 at 22:57 +1030, Simon Lees wrote:

In reality the only way you could do something like this and actually have it work is not by requiring Vendors to "offer a choice" but rather a model where consumers could hand there OEM keys back to Microsoft and get a rebate in return.

I agree that something like this is the better option. Vendors should be free to ship whatever software they want with their products, according to what they think sells best, or is most suitable for purpose, or whatever. However, consumers should also be free to wipe the bundled software and replace it with something else. And, crucially, if the bundled software isn't free, there should be a standard procedure for returning the license and get a refund. Then I would finally be able to buy whatever laptop I want without being forced to pay a Microsoft tax. :-) Like Richard I don't really think this sort of political activism is

the current role of the openSUSE project but I think its a good thing that we support organizations such as FSFE who's roll it is to look at such things. I'd also be happy if a vote of members found that we should adjust our role / vision to include such things.

Agree - it's not necessarily something openSUSE as a project should engage in pushing, even if it somewhat aligns with our goals. Olav

Hello Richard, Am Montag, 14. März 2022, 14:16:53 CET schrieb Richard Brown:

With all due respect, the Board's stated function is:

- Act as a central point of contact - Help resolve conflicts - Communicate community interests to SUSE - Facilitate communication with all areas of the community - Facilitate decision making processes where needed. - Initiate discussions about new project wide initiatives

The Project's stated function is to build Linux distributions, and promote the use of Linux (source: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Guiding_principles )

Neither the role of Board, nor the Project as a whole, states or suggests that they exist to engage is quasi-legal fights against nation states or super-national organisations.

Neither the Board, nor any other contributor to this initiative is engaging in 'legal fights'. However, each contributor can decide about his/her time and the goals one want to achieve, and bring this to the community.

Especially on a topic of that is only tangentally related to openSUSE specifcally and Linux generally; Forcing companies to offer OS choice doesn't mean that Linux will be an available choice, and even if they do offer Linux, companies are far more likely to offer any other Linux before ours for a whole host of reasons.

To give you some background: The first idea resp approach was that EU should strenghten user rights by forcing manufacturers to provide a free operating sysem as first choice. Any other system may be provided as option, at true costs of the license. However, during discussions with policy experts it became clear that this would now not give a tangible result. First we need to clarify that user rights are affected, and this is what that is about. Next steps can be taken thereafter

It's also not like Desktop is a super relevant, burning, timely issue of interest to the majority of people these days.

I disagree. Sure the smartphone covers a lot of activities, but still Laptops and Desktops are primary workhorses. And this is where I (amongst other users) focus on. Regarding cloud and Edge, I dont feel we have an issue with preinstalled systems. And you are totally free to push that area.

I'd rather see this project focus on actual relevant real world issues, such as:

- encoraging more contributors to actually contribute to our codebases, - improving the polish of our distributions, especially when it comes to the increasingly relevant cloud & edge use cases - having openSUSE better reflect the diversity of relevant use cases of Linux (server, edge, cloud, embedded...and desktop) rather than it's current over-emphasis of desktop often at the expense of others - focusing openSUSE on areas where contributions are stronger and where alternative technologies couldn't lighten the load on our contributor base (eg. do we really need to package LibreOffice when they're doing it for us as Flatpaks?)

For sure, these are important areas for openSUSE and they are warrant to look into. Volunteers welcome

It just doesn't seem like a good use of the Board's effort to fight the EU when we've got plenty to improve that will directly relevant to openSUSE.

The efforts the board takes to support the openSUSE Community are not affected by this initiative. Cheers Axel

Hello Richard, Am Donnerstag, 17. März 2022, 15:43:36 CET schrieb Richard Brown:

On Wed, 2022-03-16 at 21:13 +0100, Axel Braun wrote:

...

Hello Richard,

Am Montag, 14. März 2022, 14:16:53 CET schrieb Richard Brown:

...

With all due respect, the Board's stated function is:

- Act as a central point of contact - Help resolve conflicts - Communicate community interests to SUSE - Facilitate communication with all areas of the community - Facilitate decision making processes where needed. - Initiate discussions about new project wide initiatives

The Project's stated function is to build Linux distributions, and promote the use of Linux (source: https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Guiding_principles )

Neither the role of Board, nor the Project as a whole, states or suggests that they exist to engage is quasi-legal fights against nation states or super-national organisations.

Neither the Board, nor any other contributor to this initiative is engaging in 'legal fights'. However, each contributor can decide about his/her time and the goals one want to achieve, and bring this to the community.

Each contributor can..but you didn't post this as Axel the

individual..you posted this as:

...

Axel

(on behalf of the openSUSE Board)

Therefore, the only reasonable conclusion was you were posting this with the intent of signing it as either the whole Board or as the Project..hence my response.

Yes, we as Board are aligned to sign it.

The rest of your response doesn't really warrent a follow-up from me as it's irrelevant. The saliant point is "should the Board/Project" sign up to such an initative.

I say no.

What you do as an individual, not "on behalf of the openSUSE Board" is a totally different matter

Thanks for your input Axel

Hello Jim, Am Sonntag, 3. April 2022, 03:06:28 CEST schrieb Jim Henderson:

On Thu, 31 Mar 2022 10:30:05 +0200, Axel Braun wrote:

...

Dear Community

[...]

...

Every community member who wishes to sign the letter as well, please drop a mail to board@l.o.o *by Friday, 08 April 2022* to be included in the letter.

Axel, this seems like a good compromise. Is there a copy of the letter that will be sent that the community members can review before deciding if they wish to sign it or not?

Sure, please use the link from the original mail: https://c.gmx.net/@329946484294293704/APCSs-yfQMiN4fKa-YpfEw You find a text document in OpenDocument format, and a spreadsheet with the DPO offices Cheers Axel