ACTION NEEDED: Understanding the current mood and trends among our contributors
Hello openSUSE! In the past few weeks, a couple of different ideas have been proposed to define the future direction of the openSUSE Leap "successor" distribution. We've put together at the openSUSE ALP Leap Replacement Architecture meetings an informative survey to better understand the current mood and trends among our contributors and users. https://survey.opensuse.org/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=277484 We'd appreciate if get feedback from as many contributors as possible. ps. If you feel that you're both project as well as distribution contributor simply pick what you currently focus most at. Thank you very much in advance Best regards Lubos Kocman openSUSE Leap Release Manager
On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 12:53:21 +0000, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory <factory@lists.opensuse.org> wrote:
Hello openSUSE!
In the past few weeks, a couple of different ideas have been proposed to define the future direction of the openSUSE Leap "successor" distribution.
We've put together at the openSUSE ALP Leap Replacement Architecture meetings an informative survey to better understand the current mood and trends among our contributors and users.
https://survey.opensuse.org/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=277484
We'd appreciate if get feedback from as many contributors as possible.
Done Personally I would prefer 1. Laptop: TW 2. Workstation: Slowroll 3. Server/Cloud: LTS (18 months+ with timely security fixes) One of the reasons I really love LTS is that I have no saying on what our customers decide on the update/upgrade process. If they decide to postpone 6 months, I have no say in the matter unless the law tells them differently. I still have to support their version of the OS, so I need to keep a system alive with that OS, but I still want my CVE's fixed. If the customer decides to ignore that, it is their risk. What I have noted in the (recent) past, is that when I am at last called to help with the update/upgrade of the OS, the tested and accepted version/release has already been replaced by yet a newer version (e.g. the customer accepted 15.2 to 15.3 and now 15.4 is current and 15.5 is already in beta). When there is LTS, I can just tell them to install all available fixes and upgrade once every 2 years or so, which seems acceptable to them. Local government is a complex customer type.
ps. If you feel that you're both project as well as distribution contributor simply pick what you currently focus most at.
Thank you very much in advance
Lubos Kocman openSUSE Leap Release Manager
-- H.Merijn Brand https://tux.nl Perl Monger http://amsterdam.pm.org/ using perl5.00307 .. 5.37 porting perl5 on HP-UX, AIX, and Linux https://tux.nl/email.html http://qa.perl.org https://www.test-smoke.org
On 2023-08-10 14:53, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
Hello openSUSE!
In the past few weeks, a couple of different ideas have been proposed to define the future direction of the openSUSE Leap "successor" distribution.
We've put together at the openSUSE ALP Leap Replacement Architecture meetings an informative survey to better understand the current mood and trends among our contributors and users.
https://survey.opensuse.org/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=277484
We'd appreciate if get feedback from as many contributors as possible.
ps. If you feel that you're both project as well as distribution contributor simply pick what you currently focus most at.
If you are interested in the opinion of Leap users, you have to ask outside of the factory mail list. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)
Hello Carlos, I am on that with you. But the group preferably wanted to focus on contributors as we're looking for feedback from those who do the most. Leap is not exactly contributor's heaven given the herritage from SUSE, and the *contribution model to these packages . It has it's audience and is currently most downloaded distro, so we its users most likely want direct replacement. Which is why is fair to ask potential contributors first. I'm bit hesitant to advertise it on social networks, but there is no hard restriction and we can easily grep for the group. **I forgot to mention that survey will be openned for three weeks, end is set to August 31st 23:59 CEST.** [0] https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Jump:OBS:SRMirroring and https://en.opensuse.org/Feature_Planning_15.6 Thank you On Thu, 2023-08-10 at 20:24 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2023-08-10 14:53, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
Hello openSUSE!
In the past few weeks, a couple of different ideas have been proposed to define the future direction of the openSUSE Leap "successor" distribution.
We've put together at the openSUSE ALP Leap Replacement Architecture meetings an informative survey to better understand the current mood and trends among our contributors and users.
https://survey.opensuse.org/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=277484
We'd appreciate if get feedback from as many contributors as possible.
ps. If you feel that you're both project as well as distribution contributor simply pick what you currently focus most at.
If you are interested in the opinion of Leap users, you have to ask outside of the factory mail list.
-- Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)
On Friday 2023-08-11 09:56, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
I am on that with you. But the group preferably wanted to focus on contributors as we're looking for feedback from those who do the most.
Leap is not exactly contributor's heaven given the herritage from SUSE, and the *contribution model to these packages . It has it's audience and is currently most downloaded distro, so we its users most likely want direct replacement. Which is why is fair to ask potential contributors first.
Once upon a time: * alpha stage begins, 6 month mad scramble to update packages, test, push, test test some more in beta * big integration effort because everything else was new too * long enjoyment (12-18month ish) for what you had painstakingly built in the prior 6 * (big) "fire and forget" Nowadays: * le Tumbleweed mechanism * very small time scale to update one package/ small time to update a package set (KDE-Plasma or something) test, push, test * little integration effort, because everything else is still almost the same * short enjoyment for what you had built in a jiffy * (small) "fire and forget" picture, but repeated a lot of times If Leap X.0 *wasn't* already mostly "just a snapshot of TW, with some updates coming later", I would be questioning what year it is. It also means that you need to include TW contributions when making a count for Leap, since most if not all of the TW work has landed in Leap X.0. For Leap X.1 to X.n, a lack of contributions is the norm. It's *supposed* to get only few updates.
On 2023-08-11 09:56, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
Hello Carlos,
I am on that with you. But the group preferably wanted to focus on contributors as we're looking for feedback from those who do the most.
But the first line of the survey says: «This is an informative survey to understand current mood and trends among our contributors and users..» It says "users". I have not done it yet, so I don't know if there is a question inside to differentiate answers from one group from the other. I suppose it would be interesting to contributors to know what the users want most ;-)
Leap is not exactly contributor's heaven given the herritage from SUSE, and the *contribution model to these packages . It has it's audience and is currently most downloaded distro, so we its users most likely want direct replacement. Which is why is fair to ask potential contributors first.
Not necessarily Leap users prefer Leap. If we had other choices (besides factory) maybe we'd like something else. I find "Slowroll" intriguing and interesting, for instance.
I'm bit hesitant to advertise it on social networks, but there is no hard restriction and we can easily grep for the group.
**I forgot to mention that survey will be openned for three weeks, end is set to August 31st 23:59 CEST.**
Thanks
[0] https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Jump:OBS:SRMirroring and https://en.opensuse.org/Feature_Planning_15.6
Thank you
-- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.4 x86_64 at Telcontar)
On 8/11/23 05:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not necessarily Leap users prefer Leap.
+1 Though release times have varied from 6-months to a year or so, we have always had a stable, traditional Linux distribution. I would like to see that continue. I will not use ALP or micros. After 20 years, SUSE's design decisions will have simply pushed the normal Linux user out in favor of models it can more easily monetized. While I can't fault the business logic, I have no desire to use a virtualized or containerized distro and I am not alone. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
+1 Am 12. August 2023 08:27:14 MESZ schrieb "David C. Rankin" <drankinatty@suddenlinkmail.com>:
On 8/11/23 05:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not necessarily Leap users prefer Leap.
+1
Though release times have varied from 6-months to a year or so, we have always had a stable, traditional Linux distribution. I would like to see that continue.
I will not use ALP or micros. After 20 years, SUSE's design decisions will have simply pushed the normal Linux user out in favor of models it can more easily monetized.
While I can't fault the business logic, I have no desire to use a virtualized or containerized distro and I am not alone.
-- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E.
On Sat, 2023-08-12 at 01:27 -0500, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 8/11/23 05:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not necessarily Leap users prefer Leap.
+1
Though release times have varied from 6-months to a year or so, we have always had a stable, traditional Linux distribution. I would like to see that continue.
I will not use ALP or micros. After 20 years, SUSE's design decisions will have simply pushed the normal Linux user out in favor of models it can more easily monetized.
While I can't fault the business logic, I have no desire to use a virtualized or containerized distro and I am not alone.
The Linarite concept is pretty much classical distribution as you know it, we'd just reuse sources/packages from ALP, just like we do from SLES nowdays. It's bit tricky as ideally we'd like to base it on Granite (only available in 2024/2025), but for now we'll have to work with the best ALP representation that is available (synced) to OBS. As of today ALP == Factory.
On 8/12/23 02:27, David C. Rankin wrote:
On 8/11/23 05:18, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not necessarily Leap users prefer Leap.
+1
Though release times have varied from 6-months to a year or so, we have always had a stable, traditional Linux distribution. I would like to see that continue.
I will not use ALP
Wow, can you explain what ALP means to you and why you would not use it? Thanks, Robert
or micros. After 20 years, SUSE's design decisions will have simply pushed the normal Linux user out in favor of models it can more easily monetized.
While I can't fault the business logic, I have no desire to use a virtualized or containerized distro and I am not alone.
-- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU Distinguished Engineer LINUX rjschwei@suse.com IRC: robjo
On Fri, 2023-08-11 at 07:56 +0000, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
Leap is not exactly contributor's heaven given the herritage from SUSE, and the *contribution model to these packages . It has it's audience and is currently most downloaded distro, so we its users most likely want direct replacement. Which is why is fair to ask potential contributors first.
My main grudge with the maintenance model in openSUSE is that a maintainer doesn't have control over the maintenance of their own packages. I don't know any other open source project where another maintainer can just make changes to the project you maintain without approval from the maintainer. Adrian
On 8/14/23 07:45, Adrian Glaubitz via openSUSE Factory wrote:
My main grudge with the maintenance model in openSUSE is that a maintainer doesn't have control over the maintenance of their own packages. I don't know any other open source project where another maintainer can just make changes to the project you maintain without approval from the maintainer.
I do not understand this complaint. As VirtualBox co-maintainer, any proposed changes are subject to review by me or the other maintainer. Nothing goes into the code unless we approve. I even have to approve my own changes!! Larry
On Monday 2023-08-14 17:05, Larry Finger wrote:
On 8/14/23 07:45, Adrian Glaubitz via openSUSE Factory wrote:
My main grudge with the maintenance model in openSUSE is that a maintainer doesn't have control over the maintenance of their own packages. I don't know any other open source project where another maintainer can just make changes to the project you maintain without approval from the maintainer.
I do not understand this complaint.
I even have to approve my own changes!!
But that only applies to /Virtualization/virtualbox. Which is totally unrelated to a submission from home:blah/virtualbox -> openSUSE:Leap:15.5:Update/virtualbox, because: * Virtualization/virtualbox is neither on the left-hand side nor on the right-hand side of the `osc sr` operation, so you are not Cc-ed * openSUSE:Leap:15.5:Update/virtualbox (iff) does not exist, you are not Cc-ed * openSUSE:Leap:15.5:Update/virtualbox exists, but no direct maintainer is assigned, so you are not Cc-ed * openSUSE:Leap:15.5:Update/virtualbox exists, but no reviewer is assigned, so you are not Cc-ed
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 8:45 AM Adrian Glaubitz via openSUSE Factory <factory@lists.opensuse.org> wrote:
On Fri, 2023-08-11 at 07:56 +0000, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
Leap is not exactly contributor's heaven given the herritage from SUSE, and the *contribution model to these packages . It has it's audience and is currently most downloaded distro, so we its users most likely want direct replacement. Which is why is fair to ask potential contributors first.
My main grudge with the maintenance model in openSUSE is that a maintainer doesn't have control over the maintenance of their own packages. I don't know any other open source project where another maintainer can just make changes to the project you maintain without approval from the maintainer.
Actually, I think it's quite common. Fedora, openSUSE, Mageia, OpenMandriva, Alpine, NixOS, etc. all have this with package maintenance. Debian is the odd duck out here in Linux distributions, where there's no good way to pull that off. That probably explains a lot of why Debian is the way it is, coordinated work is almost impossible to pull off without some kind of central agent driving change. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
On 8/14/23 08:45, Adrian Glaubitz via openSUSE Factory wrote:
On Fri, 2023-08-11 at 07:56 +0000, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
Leap is not exactly contributor's heaven given the herritage from SUSE, and the *contribution model to these packages . It has it's audience and is currently most downloaded distro, so we its users most likely want direct replacement. Which is why is fair to ask potential contributors first.
My main grudge with the maintenance model in openSUSE is that a maintainer doesn't have control over the maintenance of their own packages. I don't know any other open source project where another maintainer can just make changes to the project you maintain without approval from the maintainer.
That's not openSUSE, that is a feature of OBS and the inheritance model of the maintainer setting. For example a maintainer in d:l:py also has maintainer powers in sub-projects thereof and if those maintainers rather trample on package maintainers feet than send SRs then you get the problem you observed. Unfortunately the situation happens far too often. But it is a separate conversation form the survey. Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU Distinguished Engineer LINUX rjschwei@suse.com IRC: robjo
On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 12:45:17PM +0000, Adrian Glaubitz via openSUSE Factory wrote:
On Fri, 2023-08-11 at 07:56 +0000, Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory wrote:
Leap is not exactly contributor's heaven given the herritage from SUSE, and the *contribution model to these packages . It has it's audience and is currently most downloaded distro, so we its users most likely want direct replacement. Which is why is fair to ask potential contributors first.
My main grudge with the maintenance model in openSUSE is that a maintainer doesn't have control over the maintenance of their own packages. I don't know any other open source project where another maintainer can just make changes to the project you maintain without approval from the maintainer.
I am not seeing this happening during openSUSE Leap Maintenance. Is this during Factory development? If yes, likely by the development group maintainers? Ciao, Marcus
A friendly reminder that we have an open survey for contributors, closing in roughly two weeks on 31st Aug. On Thu, 2023-08-10 at 14:53 +0200, Lubos Kocman wrote:
Hello openSUSE!
In the past few weeks, a couple of different ideas have been proposed to define the future direction of the openSUSE Leap "successor" distribution.
We've put together at the openSUSE ALP Leap Replacement Architecture meetings an informative survey to better understand the current mood and trends among our contributors and users.
https://survey.opensuse.org/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=277484
We'd appreciate if get feedback from as many contributors as possible.
ps. If you feel that you're both project as well as distribution contributor simply pick what you currently focus most at.
Thank you very much in advance
Best regards
Lubos Kocman openSUSE Leap Release Manager
Had some spare time now, to answer this survey :) Den tors 10 aug. 2023 kl 14:53 skrev Lubos Kocman via openSUSE Factory <factory@lists.opensuse.org>:
Hello openSUSE!
In the past few weeks, a couple of different ideas have been proposed to define the future direction of the openSUSE Leap "successor" distribution.
We've put together at the openSUSE ALP Leap Replacement Architecture meetings an informative survey to better understand the current mood and trends among our contributors and users.
https://survey.opensuse.org/index.php?r=survey/index&sid=277484
We'd appreciate if get feedback from as many contributors as possible.
ps. If you feel that you're both project as well as distribution contributor simply pick what you currently focus most at.
Thank you very much in advance
Best regards
Lubos Kocman openSUSE Leap Release Manager
participants (14)
-
Adrian Glaubitz -
Carlos E. R. -
David C. Rankin -
Eric Schirra -
H.Merijn Brand -
Jan Engelhardt -
Larry Finger -
Larry Len Rainey -
Lubos Kocman -
Luna Jernberg -
Marcus Meissner -
Neal Gompa -
Peter McD -
Robert Schweikert