Hi,

> > Can you point me to concrete examples on the documentation that

> > affect that fight?

> > We didn't have any intention to go against it.

>

> The fact that there IS a document addressing SUSE Employees

> specifically makes them different to the broaded openSUSE community.

> That's the underlying issue here.

The document has four goals. There are no further intentions beyond them. They are better described in our team blog post about this topic[1].

Let quote them for those who haven read the document:

"The goal of this document is to:

• Serve as main reference to the existing documentation around the process.
• Provide the big picture of the process to those potentially interested in joining.
• Help us to detect areas for improvements.
• Explain the process to SUSE employees. "

I think that the first three justify the document by itself. We could have skipped the fourth one in order to avoid controversy, but we think it would be unfair and, at some point, it would be noticeable anyway.

>

> >> A lot of transparency helped in achieving that, opening channels

> >> and there. And the 'mood' did settle in for that. Please, let's not

> >> spoil that and become a corporation vs 'volunteer community' again.

> >

> > I think that having a documents where the current process is

> > explained is an exercise

> > of transparency, which is the first step for delegating and sharing

> > responsibilities that

> > are still within SUSE.

>

> That is appreciated. But then, as Robert also pointed out, you have to

> make sure that the document mentions things that are relevant to the

> project, and now that seems relevant for how SUSE wants the project to

> be (Product Manager role for example; as perfectly outlined by Robert,

> does not fit the current project)

SUSE decided to remove the the openSUSE Product Manager title. AJ was the last openSUSE product manager at SUSE.

But there are some tasks/responsibilities that this role had assigned that still make sense internally. Since many of the tasks around the Release are done in SUSE, the role still have influence in some internal areas. This is why you see this role in the document.

Again, we have described the current Development Process, not the process we want to have. We are trying to let you know how the process work in areas that probably were dark before. I assume that part of this information might not be pleasant for some, but it is how we are currently working.

>

> > Are there things in the process we don't like? Let's change them.

> > "Shooting at the

> > journalists" for documenting them is not part of the solution.

>

> I don't think anybody here is on a personal vendetta against you. You

> published a document and asked for feedback. Things pointed out are

> that the document implies too much 'SUSE being special' That's all.

We have tried to be very accurate, but we are not the referee, we are players here. This is why we are asking for feedback. And the more concrete is that feedback, the easier for us to improve the document.

And no, I do not take these criticisms as personal. If that is what it seemed from my comment, I didn't express myself correctly.

>

> Dominique

[1] http://lizards.opensuse.org/2013/09/18/documenting-the-opensuse-development-and-release-process/

Saludos

--

Agustin Benito Bethencourt

openSUSE Team Lead at SUSE

abebe@suse.com