On Mon, 7 Sep 2009, Mariano Iumiento wrote:
In terms of the software product itself, I think it would be inefficient to create a new distribution. What I am getting at is ideally we would be a clone of CentOS but based on SLE. Thus, for example, we can achieve binary compatibility with software for SLES. I don't think the prominence of RHEL would be what it is without CentOS, IMO the Linux market for commercial software would have been more segmented.
I personally lean in the openSLE camp. But there has been some very compelling arguments about openSUSE LTS. The big one being the great community we have. The way it appears that openSUSE get's security fixes before SLES. I am not saying openSUSE does. Just the appearence. This is fuel by the great support methods openSUSE has developed. It has a very strong case because of it. I think that is why my tally of people having expressed an opinion is 18,19 openSUSE LTS,openSLES. With 4-8 people that want to get going on openSLES right now. What I see as the biggest problem with openSUSE LTS is who will do all the back porting of Security fixes. It is a lot easier to remove and replace copyright, Trademark, branding, ... for a binary compitable OS. That is why it is so hard to make a decission. one vote more for openSLES is not enough to show clear consenous in a direction. We will make a descision after the openSUSE conference.
Is Novell really against an free (as in beer) clone of SLES, and would they do anything to stop us? What are the legal considerations, namely: what parts of SLES are not distributed under the GPL or other open licenses? How much work would it take to build such a distribution?
Red Hat makes it extremely clear on what to remove to be acceptable and avoid any legal entanglements. We would have to do this on our own. We do not have any pockets, deep or other wise should we end up on the wrong side of Novell. I have had a lawyer look over things, an his opinion was the same as you stated above, but he clearly pointed out that he does not specialist in the area and what he has said really is just his opinion. He said we really need someone who specializes in the area to make a review of the guidelines and product. Right now we do not have it. That is one of the issues with openSLE. It would be really easy to end up on the wrong side of Novell. This is just some of the things that have been presented.
I have received some support from openSUSE management. Those working on this initiative have talked with the openSUSE management and we really do not see any issues with them. Also it seems that the SLES management is begining to look at the initiative in a positive light. What I have probems with is the higher levels o Novell. I have heard them say that this would be a possible thret. And would have legal watch it very closly. This is not a direct quote more a reading of what was being said. So, that is why we are taking things in a set order. That is also why it is taking so long. We have to have our guidelines fully developed and rpmlint rules in place where possible to make the initiative successful. We are right now doing the guidelines. They are in scope of what would be needed for either direction at the moment. A legal review of the guidelines will be needed. Then we should be able to start on the coding. I'm not sure if this has been evaluated, but the 'SUSE Appliance
On Sat, 2009-09-05 at 08:03 -0600, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote: program' [1] is the formal Partners/ISV possibility to develop any SLEx based appliances by using either KIWI, SUSE Studio, SLE JeOS, SLES for Amazon EC2. I would say 'go for the SUSE Studio' method since it allows to create a SLES based .iso where packages and repositories can be added/removed, as well as for the 'branding group of packages'. [2]
The program allows a Novell Business Partner (it could be the 'organization' of the 'openSLE', or whatever it will be the final name) to be supported with their developed appliance. The requirement is that (obviously) there has to be an agreement between the Partner and Novell that requires a fee to be paid (it's some sort of percentage on revenue). [3] The program allows also a free trial evaluation to potential customers as per the SLES evaluation licensing, making sales more easy.
I think that all this stuff should be analyzed more in details. [4]
Considering that there is a real intention about doing this project, either by creating some sort of organization (either profit or non-profit) or by just creating a Community, there is surely the need of some sort of budgets, no matters where they come from, but there is surely a need of funds.
I have had an attorney look over 2 different possible legal organizations. Both are non-profit as a possible legal entity. One is a business trust. I also know that it might be possible to have something under the new legal organization for openSUSE. There is a lot to be discussed. I hope it could be done at the up comming conference. I hope that IRC yaloki could head it.
Since the beginning of the discussion, the target of the new 'distro' is appeared to be small/medium businesses where the distro could be installed at a lower price than SLES but with more support than openSUSE, so we are talking about 'business', and not free-time.
Therefore, I believe that the solution could be something like: - Define the 'go-to-market' model and the 'budgeting': even if there is a fee to provide to Novell, there is also some earning from 'selling' the appliance (or the related services) that could probably justify the fee and pay the 'organization' bills (we're talking about business!). - Contact Novell [5] for more details and establish the agreement. This will also prevent any legal problems. - Setup an organization and 'organize' it (employees?).
One more advantage from this solution is that the 'customized' SLES based distro will be supported by Novell!!!
If this will be the decision to follow, than an 'openSLE' solution would be THE way to go.
[1] http://www.novell.com/partners/technology/isv/appliance/ [2] http://www.novell.com/it-it/IT/news/press/novell-announces-significant-isv-s... [3] http://www.novell.com/partners/technology/isv/appliance/program.html [4] http://www.novell.com/partners/technology/isv/appliance/getting_started.html [5] http://www.novell.com/partners/technology/isv/appliance/contact.html
-- Boyd Gerber <gerberb@zenez.com> 801 849-0213 ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047 -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org