June 2019 - openSUSE Project - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[opensuse-project] Fwd: A decade later, any update on openSUSE strategy?
by Imad Aldoj 19 Jun '19

19 Jun '19

Hi, Today [through my usual unplanned wiki ride] I landed on this page https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Strategy from the Novell era (2010) and it was a really interesting read, mainly the SWOT analysis. Surprisingly, (or not) a lot of it is still relevant today, even tho on the other hand, a lot happened in the tech world. How *and if* the community demography itself has changed? what challenges do we face today? and where are we heading next? I think this is a good time to look back again and analyze the outcome of the last decade and maybe how other distros did compared to openSUSE (specifically Fedora and Arch) Looking at the last few years, what's your view? would be cool to hear some opinions of people who did the last round. Imad -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

4 7

[opensuse-project] openSUSE Membership reminder.
by Simon Lees 18 Jun '19

18 Jun '19

Hi All, Just a general reminder that over the coming months there will be several decisions the openSUSE project will be making ranging from name and branding / logo through to the creation of a foundation, such issues will be decided via membership votes. Anyone who contributes to openSUSE is able to apply for membership following the process listed at [1]. My guess is we have a number of contributors who have never applied for membership because voting for the board doesn't seem important to them, where as some of these other issues may be. If that is the case, now would be a great time to apply so that we don't flood the membership committee so much that it holds up the votes. Cheers Simon 1. https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Members -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

6 6

[opensuse-project] Re: Proposal for Decision Making Process for the formation of our Foundation
by Jim Henderson 10 Jun '19

10 Jun '19

On Thu, 06 Jun 2019 15:11:48 +0200, Richard Brown wrote: > There are topics like those raised in the ongoing name/logo thread, but > I foresee many more in the future, regarding such as things like > budgets, membership dues, etc. Maybe I missed discussion about this, but "membership dues" is concerning to me - I think this project should continue to be driven by the people who do the work, not the people who make monetary contributions. As such, I wouldn't be in favor of individuals or organizations being able to buy influence in the project. I know there's a long history of people wanting to be able to give money to the project to help with costs, and I'm fine with that as long as membership and influence over the project isn't predicated on "he who has the gold makes the rules". My $0.02. ;) -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

3 4

[opensuse-project] Proposal for Decision Making Process for the formation of our Foundation
by Richard Brown 09 Jun '19

09 Jun '19

Hi all, I'd like to propose the following approach for the Project as to handle the decisions that need to be answered before we can formally form a Foundation for the Project. There are topics like those raised in the ongoing name/logo thread, but I foresee many more in the future, regarding such as things like budgets, membership dues, etc. These discreet aspects of our Projects governance will need to be decided, and the community at large should be involved in those decisions. At the same time, I think we all want to avoid being stuck in endless loops of endless discussions and endless votes. My proposal is as follows - Topics surrounding the formation of the Foundation should be raised for discussion on opensuse-project(a)opensuse.org - If the discussion produces a clear consensus, as interpreted by the openSUSE Board, then the Board should vote to adopt that consensus as a formal decision of the Project. This vote should require a 2/3s Majority of the Board like required under the Board Election Amendment rules [1] - The interpretation of consensus by the Board should be communicated in advance of any vote by the Board, and should be open to challenge on the opensuse-project mailinglist. - If the discussion does not produce a clear consensus, a vote of openSUSE Members should be conducted - The result of any vote that involves at least 2/3s of the current membership will be considered immediately binding as a formal decision of the Project - The result of any vote that receives less than 2/3s of the current membership will not be considered binding, but will be considered indicative. - The openSUSE Board will then be expected to interpret that indicative result and conduct its own vote on the topic, requiring a 2/3s majority for any decision. To give a real world example - the above policy would mean that the current Name/Logo discussion is on track for a membership vote, as no one in their right mind should think that the discussion has a clear consensus :) The above proposal would only apply for individual aspects of the overarching effort to establish a Foundation for the Project. I do not propose it should apply for the actual formation of the Foundation. For that I believe there should be a final confirmatory vote of the openSUSE Membership. That should require 2/3s participation to be considered valid, and it will be that vote that will formally reflect the communities agreement or rejection of the formation of a Foundation for the Project. I feel the Board should not have a fallback role on such a significant topic for the Project. Failure of the vote to receive 2/3rs participation in the vote should be considered a rejection of the Foundation, due to lack of sufficient interest from the Membership. If everyone agrees, I think the above model should let us move quickly on many aspects of the Foundation we need to approach in the coming months, while ensuring everyone has their chance to have their say. It should also ensure that we're all collectively happy both on individual aspects of the Foundation and the concept as a whole once we have a better picture of what it will look like in practice. Regards Richard Writing as an individual contributor (ie. I didn't discuss this with my Board colleagues before posting it) [1] https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Board_election_rules -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

8 15

Re: [opensuse-project] Proposal for Decision Making Process for the formation of our Foundation
by Patryk Zera 08 Jun '19

08 Jun '19

To bring the whole voting process in line with Board voting I would also propose that 20% of membership is required to replace foundation or change aspects of it. Which is nonsense. As I see it, we as a Project need input from at least majority of members in such major and important topics. This is deciding future. You can't put it in hands of 20%. Add "I abstain", "I don't care" or something similar to get neutral input in voting but I think Project need to hear "something" from membership. If such voting is binding from 20% because we fear that not many more Members will even care to vote then why even bother with setting this artificial border - just accept any voting result. peace, Patryk Zera -------------------------------------------- 6.6.19 (Czw), Simon Lees <sflees(a)suse.de> napisał(a): Temat: Re: [opensuse-project] Proposal for Decision Making Process for the formation of our Foundation Do: opensuse-project(a)opensuse.org Data: 6 Czerwiec 2019 (Czwartek), 23:30 On 07/06/2019 06:44, Simon Lees wrote: > > - 25% of the membership must vote in a ballot before it is considered > binding, any vote under 25% shall be treated as the membership not > having a strong opinion and it shall be upto the board to determine the > best resolution for the issue. Upon further thought i'm going to change the 25% to 20% to bring it in line with the number of members required to replace the board Cheers -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 1

Re: [opensuse-project] Project name and logo discussion
by Stasiek Michalski 05 Jun '19

05 Jun '19

On śro, Jun 5, 2019 at 6:28 PM, Xaver Hellauer <xaver(a)hellauer.bayern> wrote: > > > ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ > On Wednesday, June 5, 2019 5:31 PM, Ish Sookun > <ish.sookun(a)lasentinelle.mu> wrote: > >> >> >> On 6/3/19 3:53 PM, Patrick Shanahan wrote: >> >> > I really was upset when it was changed from SuSE and again SUSE, >> but >> > understand the need to move to openSUSE. I believe the effort >> needed to >> > resolve all the necessary issues is much better expended on >> further >> > development of our distribution. and Leap and Tumbleweed should >> remain >> > distinctive sub "brand" names for openSUSE. >> >> How about having a foundation name different as the distro name and >> we >> get to keep openSUSE? Something like: >> >> +--------------------+ >> | Example Foundation | >> +---------+----------+ >> | >> | >> v >> +-----+----+ >> | openSUSE | >> +----+-----+ >> | >> v--------+----------v >> +------+ +------------+ >> | Leap | | Tumbleweed | >> +------+ +------+-----+ >> | >> | >> v------+-----v >> +-------+ +---------+ >> | Kubic | | MicroOS | >> +-------+ +---------+ >> > > How about just giving a new name to the foundation loosely tied to > the existing brand (e.g. Squamata Foundation) and just dropping the > "openSUSE" without replacement. The distributions do have names > already. So basically "openSUSE Tumbleweed" becomes "Tumbleweed" and > "openSUSE Leap" becomes "Leap" with highly visible release names > (maybe different lizards) like Debian's and Ubuntu's releases. In my > opinion this would be beneficial to marketing. Everybody cares about > "Disco Dingo", but "15.2" sounds quite boring. > Dropping the "openSUSE" has the following benefits: > * Seemingly cutting ties to a Novell/Microsoft Deal/"Corporate > Overlord" past without creating "SUSE is abandonning openSUSE" FUD. I do wonder if that is over, it has been more than 10 years already for some of those events. > * Tumbleweed and Leap are recognizable brands with very different > audiences, they don't need an umbrella name (like Fedora and CentOS > don't have one either). Well, in case of Fedora distros, there is Fedora Workstation, Fedora Server, Fedora CoreOS, Fedora IoT and Fedora Silverblue (not to count DE spins), when people are talking about "Fedora" they usually mean Workstation/Spins/Server. Fedora is very much an umbrella name for a bunch of different distributions, just like openSUSE. We do have much higher chance of having distro names separate from the project name though, because the names aren't as generic as Fedora's. As an example Tumbleweed, MicroOS and Kubic already have parts of branding that don't mention openSUSE, and Leap 15.2 might too if I'm motivated enough to get that going in the coming year. > * Not being called anything *SUSE* might help making Packman (or at > least some of the packman packages) more official, which would help > making it more easy to install them (Ubuntu-easy, not the existing > "easier than before, but still not really noob-friendly). Mageia for > example got rid of the PLF repo, when they were no longer > Mandrake/Mandriva branded. Not being associated with a corporation, and being a registered foundation does not free us from obeying the patent law, I don't really see how that would work... LCP [Stasiek] https://lcp.world -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0

Re: [opensuse-project] Project name and logo discussion
by S. 04 Jun '19

04 Jun '19

On Tue, 04 Jun 2019 10:14:02 +0200 Stasiek Michalski <hellcp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Gecko Linux is abandoned, [...] GeckoLinux creator here. GeckoLinux is *NOT* abandoned. Please stop spreading misinformation. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

2 3

[opensuse-project] 2019-04-02 board meeting minutes
by Christian Boltz 04 Jun '19

04 Jun '19

Hello, here are the meeting minutes of the 2019-04-02 board meeting. If you prefer the wiki formatting, you can also read them on https://en.opensuse.org/Archive:Board_meeting_2019-04-02 There are some items with a "feedback welcome" - if you want to comment on them (or the other things), feel free to answer here or to board@ == Foundation/Independence == * we need to decide which way (e.V., joining an umbrella foundation) makes sense - topic for the face to face meeting, feedback on opensuse-project@ is of course welcome * Simon will write up a summary of the options of umbrella foundations * in general feedback from SUSE about becoming independent is positive, but we've also heard a concern that independence could be driven by fundamental things, not practical reasons * if ever needed, we could ignore whatever SUSE does and go our own way * a foundation / independence would make legal stuff like GDPR our business * Simon will talk to Ciaran how we could handle GDPR and other legal stuff == mail hosting using mailbox.org == We have an offer from Heinlein / mailbox org to make @opensuse.org mail addresses real mailboxes. Do our members want this? (Feedback on opensuse-project and @oSC welcome) == GDPR request == openSUSE received a GDPR request which now gets handled by the responsible people. == Cloudfest in Rust == We've seen the discussion on the opensuse-project mailinglist why openSUSE wasn't at Cloudfest. * base requirement (as always) is to have volunteers * commercial booth prices are insane, we'd have to find out if they offer free community booths Regards, Christian Boltz -- Es ist halt nur nicht eine einzige zentrale Filterdatei. Vorteil ist, dass die Anwender ihre eigenen Scripte verwalten (und sich dabei in den Fuss schiessen können). Nachteil ist genau das gleiche. (^-^) [Sandy Drobic in suse-linux über Sieve] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

19 49

Re: [opensuse-project] Project name and logo discussion
by Patryk Zera 03 Jun '19

03 Jun '19

Hello, I think openSUSE should stay openSUSE. As logo was orignally also part of this topic, I think I can live with changed logo. Regards, Patryk "Sanchez" Zera -------------------------------------------- 3.6.19 (Pon), Richard Brown <RBrownCCB(a)opensuse.org> napisał(a): (...) Do you think openSUSE should change it's name? Regards, Richard -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org

1 0