Hi everybody,
as you all know, we have the openSUSE Members, a group of contributors through
their sustained and substantial contributors that are eligible to participate
in elections, have @opensuse.org mail and other perks. We have now about 600
of them, but as you can see[1] in last openSUSE Board elections only 150 of
them voted.
This could mean two things - either most of the members are not interested in
elections or plenty of them are simply no longer around. I guess the truth is
somewhere in middle. This is something we need to know when we take project
wide decisions in order to correctly assess the communities interest in the
topic.
This is a recurring topic that has been discussed at the openSUSE Board Face to
Face meeting last year, oSC 15, and on this list several times over the last
few years. Taking these into consideration, we (in the board) think it would
be a good idea to implement something to help with ensuring our Membership list
accurately reflects our current Membership. I have put together a tool which
attempts to detect an openSUSE Members activity on mailing lists, OBS,
bugzilla, maybe more. This tool will remember when we last saw openSUSE Member
on any of those channels and if they doesn't show for 6 months, we will send
them an e-mail asking whether they still wants to be a member. A response to
that email will automatically count as activity and preserve the Members
status. If there is no response within 30 days of the notification, the Member
will be 'retired' and be considered a 'Member emeritus'. If someone is retired
incorrectly, or a 'Member emeritus' returns to the Project and wants a
restoration of their voting privilege, they will be unretired without question
by the Membership Committee.
There are few implementation details to be worked out, so we don't expect this
to go live overnight but consider this a "statement of intent" and an
explanation of how we expect things to work before we start testing the
process.
====
To answer some of the obvious questions:
Q: Shouldn't we retire inactive members anyway after measuring and evaluating
their activity?
A: No, that would be too hard, too subjective and it could bother people that
we cannot measure automatically. Automatic measurement is just an indicator
that those people are no longer interested, but they might be just working
on project aspects we cannot measure. openSUSE Members are members until
THEY no longer want to be. We believe this system preserves that principle.
Q: Wouldn't it offend active contributors if they will be falsely accused of
not being interested?
A: I hope not. If period will be long enough (6 months) and if we monitor even
mailing lists, people will usually show up somewhere. We intend to word the
'ping' email in a way that is not judgemental, but just makes it clear that
we have failed to automatically find evidence of contribution so want to make
sure they are still interested in remaining a Member.
Q: Doesn't it change the meaning of the openSUSE Member?
A: Not really. So far once you got a membership status, it was forever without
question. Now it would be forever as long as you are interested. No big
change, just a little difference.
Q: What if mail with warning gets lost?
A: If you lose your membership by accident by losing an e-mail, you can still
contact membership committee and as a retired member you will be reinstated
immediately without voting/verification that takes time. And you should fix
your e-mail in connect.opensuse.org in that case ;-)
Q: Will retired members retain their email & IRC cloak perks?
A: No, the intention is that retired members will no longer be eligible for
@opensuse.org email addresses and Freenode IRC cloaks.
[1] https://connect.opensuse.org/pg/polls/read/pluskalm/49480/opensuse-board-el…
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On 24 April 2017 at 07:16, Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 7:37 AM, Richard Brown <RBrownCCB(a)opensuse.org> wrote:
>> There are only a few packages in our distribution that reference the
>> 42.x versioning, and they should be easily handled as part of a zypper
>> dup, so we are not concerned about this decision impacting users
>> upgrading.
>
>
> This statement concerns me more than anything else. What about all the
> people who build solutions around openSUSE or for it? We *just*
> managed to figure out the new mess that is SUSE versioning, and now
> you want to break us again?
>
> The number of conditionals I need for supporting the SUSE platform
> keeps growing with each release, and that's extremely aggravating.
Yes, I understand that, but one of the benefits of this change means
you'll be able to get rid of some of those conditionals when Leap 42.3
reaches end of life, as opposed to needing to keep conditionals around
for 4x.y forever
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hi all,
If anyone wants to help out at the booth at FrOSCon, please let me know.
v/r
Doug
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hi all,
On behalf of the openSUSE Board and Leap Release Management I am
pleased to announce the next version of openSUSE Leap after 42.3 will
be:
openSUSE Leap 15
As with Leap 42.x, minor releases are expected annually for at least 3
years, so you can expect a Leap 15.1 to follow, then 15.2 and onwards.
Obviously this is quite a dramatic change from the current version
number of 42.x, so I will explain what justifies this change in some
detail below.
First, some history. When we started openSUSE Leap, the version number
was an issue that needed addressing. openSUSE at that time was at
13.2, but SUSE Linux Enterprise (SLE) was at 12 and heading towards 12
SP1.
As the main unique selling point of Leap compared to every other
distribution is the fact it is based on SLE sources. We wanted to
reflect that in the version number.
This was particularly important when you consider that a major version
in SLE really means something ("major architectural changes from the
last version are introduced here") whereas minor versions/service
packs have a very different message ("easy to upgrade to, no major
workflow breaking changes"). Leap follows a similar philosophy, so we
wanted a versioning scheme to reflect SLEs.
But openSUSE had already had versions starting with 12, so we couldn't
sync up with SLE. This is where 42.x came from. It gave us the
opportunity to establish a relationship with SLE versions (SLE Version
+ 30 = Leap Version), reflect the major/minor nature of Leap releases,
and avoid clashes with version numbers we'd already used.
The choice of 42 doubled as a humorous nod to hitchhikers guide to the
galaxy and the first version numbers of SuSE Linux and YaST (4.2 and
0.42 respectively).
The plan was therefore for the next version of Leap to be 43 with it's
release aligned with SLE 13, followed by Leap 43.1 (with SLE 13 SP1),
Leap 43.2 (w. SP2), etc
However, like all good plans, things change.
SUSE have decided that their next version of SLE will be 15, not 13.
Upon learning of SUSE's plans the Board and Leap release team have
been considering our options.
This included ignoring the changes to SLE and releasing Leap 43 as
planned, at the cost of the link between SLE versions and Leap
versions.
45 was also considered, as were some frankly hilarious ideas that made
me worry about my own sanity and that of my fellow contributors.
After considering the pros and cons of all the options however, the
decision has been that Leap 15 will be our next version.
SUSE's decision to skip SLE 13 and 14 gave us a perfect opportunity to
sync up with SLE versions like we always wanted to originally with
Leap. It's an opportunity we will not be able to take so easily a few
years from now if we continued with Leaps current versioning.
There are only a few packages in our distribution that reference the
42.x versioning, and they should be easily handled as part of a zypper
dup, so we are not concerned about this decision impacting users
upgrading.
We are aware that this decision could be a minor annoyance for users
of Leap with configuration management tools like saltstack and puppet,
but the long term opportunity to simplify such configuration (by being
able to treat SLE and Leap similarly) outweighed our desire to avoid a
'one-time' effort for people currently handling the overly complicated
situation caused by Leap being at 42.x and SLE being at 12 SPx.
Packagers should be able to look forward to an easier time of things
as a result of this change. We intend to deprecate the
0%{leap_version} macro and simplify the current complex nest of
suse_version and sle_versions that can make it very frustrating to
build packages appropriately for Tumbleweed, Leap and SLE.
0%{suse_version} should continue to be available as a simple indicator
of the major version of Leap & SLE for packagers (eg, 0%{suse_version}
== 1500 is the expected value for SLE 15 and Leap 15 and all of their
minor versions/service packs).
0%{sle_version} should remain as a more precise indicator when
packagers need to handle specific versions of Leap and SLE (eg.
0%{sle_version} == 150000 is the expected value for SLE 15 & Leap 15,
with 150100 being the expected value for SLE 15 SP1 & Leap 15.1)
0%{is_opensuse} will continue for those times when packagers need to
distinguish between Leap and SLE even though they will now more
closely share their versions.
The above examples and what the future suse_version number will be for
Tumbleweed is not yet final, so expect to see emails from ludwig in
opensuse-factory(a)opensuse.org when they are set.
Thanks to everyone involved in this so far, I'm looking forward to
seeing what we make out of Leap 15, and even though I cross-posted
this I would like to ask that any followup conversation is kept to the
opensuse-project(a)opensuse.org thread.
Regards,
Richard Brown
on behalf of the openSUSE Board
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hi all,
i get it... openSUSE Leap 15, because SLES 15.
So how about this scheme which should be BINDING for ALL products from
now on:
First lets get rid of that silly "Leap".
Second, as of the next release, the major release number for openSUSE,
SLES and SLED is 15, the minor will be 0.
after that, the following conditions will be applied:
A interim release ("service pack") increases the minor version.
A release where either the kernel has a new minor or at least three
other base components have a new major number will get the major
version increased and the minor reset to 0.
That would give us:
openSUSE 15.0
SuSE Linux Enterprise Server 15.0
SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 15.0
openSUSE Tumbleweed (since TW is a rolling release version numbers on
the distro are utter BS)
and for the next versions:
if the KERNEL gets a higher minor number (e.g. 4.11 -> 4.12), nothing
else matters, and the new release would become 16.0
if three major base components (e.g. for a Desktop distro, the X server
AND GNOME AND KDE/Plasma, for a Server Distro for example Samba,
Postfix, Courier IMAP), get a new version with the MAJOR number being
higher (GNOME 4, KDE 6, that kind of stuff) the new one would also
become 16.0
If the new release does not have a new kernel, or less than three of the
core coponents have a new major version, the new version would be the
same major, minor increased by one.
So by all probability and previous experience we'd have 15.0, 15.1,
15.2, and possibly 15.3 before getting to 16.0.
on OBS that would be 1500, 1501, 1502, 1503 and 1600.
and all is well.
cheers
MH
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On Sunday, 23 April 2017 0:51 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> Of the projects which went to skyrocketing version numbers
> (controversial in their own right), such as firefox, systemd, ...
> none have dared to jump backwards. Because it'd fuck up version
> comparisons everywhere.
Right. Just one thing from the top of my head:
mike@lion:~> rpm -qa --queryformat '%{VERSION}\n' | egrep '^42\.[12](\..*)?$' | wc -l
23
I'm pretty sure there will be others, more subtle and harder to work
around (IIRC "zypper dup" is quite happy to downgrade a package if the
installed version is no longer available in any active repository).
Michal Kubeček
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:41 PM, Mathias Homann
<Mathias.Homann(a)opensuse.org> wrote:
> my wife was just looking over my shoulder.... her comment: "If they can't even be
> consistent about the version number scheme, what about the software?"
+1
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hi everyone,
I just want to let everyone know that the first round of talks for the
openSUSE Conference has been approved. Please confirm your talk if it
was approved. I ask that you do this ASAP at
https://events.opensuse.org/, so we can determine if there will be a
second round of approvals.
v/r
Doug
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org