Gnome 3 Launch Party MadLab Manchester April 10th 2011

stuart＠bolin.org.uk

10 Apr 2011 10 Apr '11

22:01

http://boltonlinux.blogspot.com/2011/04/gnome-3-launch-party-madlab-manchest... Full details here.. Stuart Tanner Bolton Linux 24 Vincent Street Heaton Bolton BL1 4SA Tel: 01204 410474 Mob: 07868 028028 www.bolin.org.uk Delivering openSUSE to the UK -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+help@opensuse.org

Show replies by date

Bryen M. Yunashko

10 Apr 10 Apr

22:51

On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 17:01 -0500, stuart@bolin.org.uk wrote:

...

http://boltonlinux.blogspot.com/2011/04/gnome-3-launch-party-madlab-manchest...

Full details here..

Stuart Tanner

I read the post and excellent report Stuart. Thank you very much for visiting MadLab and for supporting GNOME 3 in its launch. This is one of several excellent examples of how we are recognizing that marketing and promoting through joint efforts is key and pays off for all parties involved. One thing that jumped out for me. You noted that some audience members pointed out that openSUSE and Fedora only exist to serve the interests of their sponsors (Novell and Red Hat.) I'm curious as to how you responded to this and if we need to build up on our talking points for responding to this perception. This is one reason why I really want us to move away from saying openSUSE is the "base for SLE." I would much rather see us start to say more and more that openSUSE is the "upstream" of SLE. After all, they are taking what we do and spin it in their own way to suit their needs. And nothing prevents any other group/organization/company from taking openSUSE and spinning it to suit their needs as well. In a very real sense, SLE is no different from openSUSE Edu-L-I-fe or openSUSE Medical. All have taken from the upstream project known as openSUSE and made their own unique spin on it. It is true that there is a very symbiotic relationship between a project and its main sponsor. But I think it is quite obvious from a plethora of discussions on various topics within our Project that we are not "serving" Novell/SLEx. The biggest obvious clue is in how the default desktop differs between SLEx and openSUSE. (KDE vs. GNOME) Furthermore, discussions and decisions are taken upon by openSUSE's community members, and to some limited extent, that of its Board. And while there is a strong presence of Novell/SUSE employees within the Project, we do not receive directives directly from Novell nor do we base our decisions in the Project for the benefit of Novell. Decisions within the community are made for the benefit of openSUSE. This will be further evidenced by the imminent creation of the openSUSE Foundation, giving the Project's members even more control over the direction of the openSUSE distribution and the Project as a whole. I think its very important that we meet these kinds of perceptions head-on. (And it is good that Stuart has brought it up here in his blog.) I can understand how people not directly involved in a project might not see that as the case. But that's what we're here, as Ambassadors, for. To educate, to inspire, to motivate and to define who and what we are. Bryen -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+help@opensuse.org

Stuart Tanner

11 Apr 11 Apr

06:58

Quoting "Bryen M. Yunashko" :

...

On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 17:01 -0500, stuart@bolin.org.uk wrote:

...
http://boltonlinux.blogspot.com/2011/04/gnome-3-launch-party-madlab-manchest...

Full details here..

Stuart Tanner

I read the post and excellent report Stuart. Thank you very much for visiting MadLab and for supporting GNOME 3 in its launch. This is one of several excellent examples of how we are recognizing that marketing and promoting through joint efforts is key and pays off for all parties involved.

I will be visiting this venue regularly to put the myths to be that have been mentioned below. The next event is Tuesday 19th April (there is Manchester's Linux User Group on Saturday 16th April but I can't make that due to prior commitments. I will go next month instead.

...

One thing that jumped out for me. You noted that some audience members pointed out that openSUSE and Fedora only exist to serve the interests of their sponsors (Novell and Red Hat.) I'm curious as to how you responded to this and if we need to build up on our talking points for responding to this perception.

I denied totally, I pointed out that openSUSE is deeply committed to the community and public I stated that first of all, something like 1 in 4 releases forms the upstream for SLED, this means that the public around 4 times as many versions as Enterprise. I stated that as an example openSUSE Retail Edition in partnership with Open-SLX is a project designed to bring money back into the community whilst at the same time allowing the project to advertise through retail stores thus increasing awareness and raising much needed funds, my own plans include donating to both the KDE and GNOME Foundations.

...

This is one reason why I really want us to move away from saying openSUSE is the "base for SLE." I would much rather see us start to say more and more that openSUSE is the "upstream" of SLE. After all, they are taking what we do and spin it in their own way to suit their needs. And nothing prevents any other group/organization/company from taking openSUSE and spinning it to suit their needs as well. In a very real sense, SLE is no different from openSUSE Edu-L-I-fe or openSUSE Medical. All have taken from the upstream project known as openSUSE and made their own unique spin on it.

I understand that Novell has developers involved with openSUSE but Novell and Redhat also have developers involved with GNOME does this therefore mean that they dictate or control the way this project is run? I think not, GNOME has abandoned Enterprise Desktop with the release of Gnome 3, the very fact that out of the box it only supports intel based chipsets or NVidia with the nouveau driver. ATi also with the opensource driver, but very few people if any in the room had compatible hardware to run Gnome 3 so I would expect that perhaps the enterprise desktop of choice once support and development for 2.x is phased out may be KDE. I tried to avoid distro bashing as they do, however i suggested that Ubuntu users who were dissatisfied with Unity and the lack of GNOME 3 should consider Kubuntu instead or switch to openSUSE which has stated there are no plans to switch to GNOME 3 any time soon (until at least version 3.2 I was told on IRC).

...

It is true that there is a very symbiotic relationship between a project and its main sponsor. But I think it is quite obvious from a plethora of discussions on various topics within our Project that we are not "serving" Novell/SLEx. The biggest obvious clue is in how the default desktop differs between SLEx and openSUSE. (KDE vs. GNOME) Furthermore, discussions and decisions are taken upon by openSUSE's community members, and to some limited extent, that of its Board. And while there is a strong presence of Novell/SUSE employees within the Project, we do not receive directives directly from Novell nor do we base our decisions in the Project for the benefit of Novell. Decisions within the community are made for the benefit of openSUSE.

I agree 100% this was just an attempt to say that business doesn't care about Linux or GPL unless they can get something for free, tweak it, then avoid releasing their adjustments back into the community and instead putting a (C) in front of it, one example was Tivo, in the US Tivo is huge as a Personal Video Recorder, maybe not so in the UK currently although their partnership with Virgin Media attempts to relaunch their UK business, TV was based on the Linux kernel with a GPL v1 license. They made significant changes to the code to suit their needs, however only released the source code on an encrypted chip within the box itself so whilst according to the letter of the law "they had provided the source code" in theory and in the spirit of the License nobody could gain access as it was on an encrypted chip embedded in the case of each box.

...

This will be further evidenced by the imminent creation of the openSUSE Foundation, giving the Project's members even more control over the direction of the openSUSE distribution and the Project as a whole.

I do believe this is long over due and will seek to redress public opinion about the balance between openSUSE and SLED.

...

I think its very important that we meet these kinds of perceptions head-on. (And it is good that Stuart has brought it up here in his blog.) I can understand how people not directly involved in a project might not see that as the case. But that's what we're here, as Ambassadors, for. To educate, to inspire, to motivate and to define who and what we are.

We are an independent Linux distribution just like Arch or Ubuntu or Fedora, just because we can corporate sponsorship doesn't mean they own us, they may own the name but they don't own the code. They do not influence any decisions as you have already stated all decisions are taken by the openSUSE Board and as I understand it only members can stand.

...

Bryen

I posed the question, what does canonical expect to gain from Ubuntu? how long are they prepared to make a loss? It was confirmed they are no longer shipping unlimited free DVD's to far flung corners of the globe as before, so that is one big change, sure the owner of canonical is quite wealthy and loves the project, but I think at some point and I am sure he wouldn't deny this, he expects canonical's fortunes to reverse and at some point it should start to return a profit. Does this mean that canonical has more influence in the development of Ubuntu that Novell has in openSUSE I think yes because the change from Gnome to Unity proves that. Throughout the conception and early development stages of GNOME3 canonical were approached numerous times to provide developers but were always too busy, then soon after announced Unity. Canonical wanted GNOME developers to sign a contribution agreement so vague that it would effectively allow canonical to take control of the code and use as they saw fit in which ever project closed or open source they saw fit, when GNOME rejected this, canonical rejected GNOME. Stuart -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+help@opensuse.org

Kim Leyendecker

17:46

Am 11.04.2011 08:58, schrieb Stuart Tanner:

...

Quoting "Bryen M. Yunashko" :

...
On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 17:01 -0500, stuart@bolin.org.uk wrote:

...
http://boltonlinux.blogspot.com/2011/04/gnome-3-launch-party-madlab-manchest...

Full details here..

Stuart Tanner

I read the post and excellent report Stuart. Thank you very much for visiting MadLab and for supporting GNOME 3 in its launch. This is one of several excellent examples of how we are recognizing that marketing and promoting through joint efforts is key and pays off for all parties involved.

I will be visiting this venue regularly to put the myths to be that have been mentioned below. The next event is Tuesday 19th April (there is Manchester's Linux User Group on Saturday 16th April but I can't make that due to prior commitments.

I will go next month instead.

...
One thing that jumped out for me. You noted that some audience members pointed out that openSUSE and Fedora only exist to serve the interests of their sponsors (Novell and Red Hat.) I'm curious as to how you responded to this and if we need to build up on our talking points for responding to this perception.

I denied totally, I pointed out that openSUSE is deeply committed to the community and public I stated that first of all, something like 1 in 4 releases forms the upstream for SLED, this means that the public around 4 times as many versions as Enterprise.

I stated that as an example openSUSE Retail Edition in partnership with Open-SLX is a project designed to bring money back into the community whilst at the same time allowing the project to advertise through retail stores thus increasing awareness and raising much needed funds,

...

my own plans include donating to both the KDE and GNOME Foundations. Nice idea!

...
This is one reason why I really want us to move away from saying openSUSE is the "base for SLE." Well, so to speak, it´s easier to say "it´s the base for SLE". I sometimes explain my mother what openSUSE and Linux is. She doesn´t know so much about it, and just wants that her machine runs fine. For her (and many others) it´s easier to say "it´s the base of SLE" because if I say, that´s the upstream of SLE, she will ask me, what´s "upstream" is and leads me to an endless talk about the linux-development-modell. ;) I would much rather see us start to say more and more that openSUSE is the "upstream" of SLE. After all, they are taking what we do and spin it in their own way to suit their needs. And nothing prevents any other group/organization/company from taking openSUSE and spinning it to suit their needs as well. In a very real sense, SLE is no different from openSUSE Edu-L-I-fe or openSUSE Medical. All have taken from the upstream project known as openSUSE and made their own unique spin on it.

I understand that Novell has developers involved with openSUSE but Novell and Redhat also have developers involved with GNOME does this therefore mean that they dictate or control the way this project is run?

I think not, GNOME has abandoned Enterprise Desktop with the release of Gnome 3, the very fact that out of the box it only supports intel based chipsets or NVidia with the nouveau driver. ATi also with the opensource driver, but very few people if any in the room had compatible hardware to run Gnome 3 so I would expect that perhaps the enterprise desktop of choice once support and development for 2.x is phased out may be KDE.

I tried to avoid distro bashing as they do, however i suggested that Ubuntu users who were dissatisfied with Unity and the lack of GNOME 3 should consider Kubuntu instead or switch to openSUSE which has stated there are no plans to switch to GNOME 3 any time soon (until at least version 3.2 I was told on IRC).

...
It is true that there is a very symbiotic relationship between a project and its main sponsor. But I think it is quite obvious from a plethora of discussions on various topics within our Project that we are not "serving" Novell/SLEx. The biggest obvious clue is in how the default desktop differs between SLEx and openSUSE. (KDE vs. GNOME) Furthermore, discussions and decisions are taken upon by openSUSE's community members, and to some limited extent, that of its Board. And while there is a strong presence of Novell/SUSE employees within the Project, we do not receive directives directly from Novell nor do we base our decisions in the Project for the benefit of Novell. Decisions within the community are made for the benefit of openSUSE.

I agree 100% this was just an attempt to say that business doesn't care about Linux or GPL unless they can get something for free, tweak it, then avoid releasing their adjustments back into the community and instead putting a (C) in front of it, one example was Tivo, in the US Tivo is huge as a Personal Video Recorder, maybe not so in the UK currently although their partnership with Virgin Media attempts to relaunch their UK business, TV was based on the Linux kernel with a GPL v1 license. They made significant changes to the code to suit their needs, however only released the source code on an encrypted chip within the box itself so whilst according to the letter of the law "they had provided the source code" in theory and in the spirit of the License nobody could gain access as it was on an encrypted chip embedded in the case of each box.

...
This will be further evidenced by the imminent creation of the openSUSE Foundation, giving the Project's members even more control over the direction of the openSUSE distribution and the Project as a whole.

I do believe this is long over due and will seek to redress public opinion about the balance between openSUSE and SLED.

...
I think its very important that we meet these kinds of perceptions head-on. (And it is good that Stuart has brought it up here in his blog.) I can understand how people not directly involved in a project might not see that as the case. But that's what we're here, as Ambassadors, for. To educate, to inspire, to motivate and to define who and what we are.

We are an independent Linux distribution just like Arch or Ubuntu or Fedora, just because we can corporate sponsorship doesn't mean they own us, they may own the name but they don't own the code. They do not influence any decisions as you have already stated all decisions are taken by the openSUSE Board and as I understand it only members can stand. +1

...
Bryen

I posed the question, what does canonical expect to gain from Ubuntu? how long are they prepared to make a loss? It was confirmed they are no longer shipping unlimited free DVD's to far flung corners of the globe as before, so that is one big change, sure the owner of canonical is quite wealthy and loves the project, but I think at some point and I am sure he wouldn't deny this, he expects canonical's fortunes to reverse and at some point it should start to return a profit.

Does this mean that canonical has more influence in the development of Ubuntu that Novell has in openSUSE I think yes because the change from Gnome to Unity proves that. Throughout the conception and early development stages of GNOME3 canonical were approached numerous times to provide developers but were always too busy, then soon after announced Unity. Canonical wanted GNOME developers to sign a contribution agreement so vague that it would effectively allow canonical to take control of the code and use as they saw fit in which ever project closed or open source they saw fit, when GNOME rejected this, canonical rejected GNOME. Sorry for saying that, I really believe that Ubuntu and Canonical does a lot for Linux because they made it easy to join the Linux-world and learn how to use, but the little (wanna-be) developer inside my heart is still in active competition with them because they don´t really care about giving back code to the upstream and just take.

I think it´s some kind of being an "interface nazi" (Sorry, for the use of nazi, but I´m really angry with the decission, that GNOME won´t be part of 11.10....) because the rejected GNOME and just say: "Okay, you get Unity, that´s enough for you". We solve it better, because we got so much desktops supported in _one_ product. This is why I don´t like the whole K/X/U/what-ever-you-want-BUNTU-strategy. This just confused the users. A GNOME and KDE live CD and a install-DVD is enough. If you want another desktop, you´ll find it on DVD. That´s enough for everyone.

...

Stuart

I´m very sorry if I maybe use some words (or names) who aren´t so welcome in the european and espacially the german living room, but this was just a citate of Linus Torvalds which comes to my mind when I´m thinking about Ubuntu and GNOME. Sorry for being sometimes to rude to Ubuntu. It´s a great linux-distros for beginners, but I´m really angry with the developers and the whole company behind Ubuntu. thanks PS: Don´t see this as a start of a flame war. It´s just my personal content of mind. -- Kim Leyendecker (kimleyendecker@hotmail.de) openSUSE Ambassador / openSUSE Wiki Team DE http://www.opensuse.org Have you tried SUSE Studio? Need to create a Live CD, an app you want to package and distribute , or create your own linux distro. Give SUSE Studio a try. www.susestudio.com. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ambassadors+help@opensuse.org

4773

Age (days ago)

4774

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

3 comments

4 participants

participants (4)

Bryen M. Yunashko
Kim Leyendecker
Stuart Tanner
stuart＠bolin.org.uk