August 2024 - openSUSE Project - openSUSE Mailing Lists

Fwd: Re: [openSUSE/distribution-logos] Logo proposal (Issue #11)
by Lukáš Krejza 23 Aug '24

23 Aug '24

Dear list, Dear Jay, @Jay at first, I would like to congratulate to Jay Michalska as a new Master Leader of openSUSE. @others Secondly, I would like to express my love and gratitude to many people from the openSUSE community I had the honor to meet, I won't list names here, but I am sure many of you know :) . openSUSE was basically part of most of my life and the community and people from it has inspired me in numerous ways in my life, not only career / libre software part of it. But sadly, It seems it has gone to the point, where negatives (that have nothing to do with people mentioned in previous paragraph) are just bigger than the positives. For me, this is the renowned final straw. I had come to conclusion, that logical way forward in my life is to switch main distribution after 20 years and find alternative for OBS, which will be hard, but sometimes things are not easy :) . So this is my farewell and my sincerest thanks <3 I am unsubscribing from the lists after sending this e-mail, so do not expect me to comment more on this. I wish openSUSE only the brightest future. I am sure we will meet again some time :) . Love, Gfs ---------- Přeposlaná zpráva ---------- Předmět: Re: [openSUSE/distribution-logos] Logo proposal (Issue #11) Datum: pátek 23. srpna 2024, 10:25:41, SELČ Od: Jay Michalska <notifications(a)github.com> Komu: openSUSE/distribution-logos <distribution-logos(a)noreply.github.com> Kopie: Lukáš Krejza <gryffus(a)hkfree.org>, Author <author(a)noreply.github.com> I'm the maintainer of this repository -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/openSUSE/distribution-logos/issues/ 11#issuecomment-2306568614 You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Message ID: <openSUSE/distribution-logos/issues/11/2306568614(a)github.com> -----------------------------------------

1 0

Next steps with Tumbleweed logo refresh
by Lubos Kocman 23 Aug '24

23 Aug '24

Hello openSUSE My recent work around agama and distribution logos, made me tackle the status quo around the Tumbleweed logo refresh after the https://en.opensuse.org/Logocontest. I did see a misfit of the current Tumbleweed logo side to side with others in our new "unified" installer Agama. https://ibb.co/RSLYbDV (Agama + old TW logo) I did have a brief discussion with DimStar about what would be a good fit for Tumbleweed with respect to the remaining distribution icons which already have fresh logos. DimStar said he likes the Frogster2 design concept the most as it keeps the infinity loop (see GitHub link below). I reached out earlier today to Frogster regarding help finishing the transition and finally moving things forward https://ibb.co/tCRHJhX (Agama + Frogster2 design) We'll be in collaboration with the rest of the openSUSE Marketing team, including lcp, to make sure that the logo design fits well into our portfolio. There will be a few iterations to address some of the issues but I believe we can be done relatively soon. All the work will be happening here https://github.com/openSUSE/distribution-logos/issues/10 with side communication t.me/openSUSE_Marketing Thank you for your support Lubos Kocman on behalf of openSUSE marketing team

4 4

Fwd: SPF records of opensuse.org is not correct
by chandan 22 Aug '24

22 Aug '24

message from admin. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: SPF records of opensuse.org is not correct Date: 2024-08-22 09:25 From: admin <abuse(a)akritrim.net> To: abuse(a)opensuse.org Cc: project(a)lists.opensuse.org Hello The SPF records of opensuse.org are misconfigured with respects to mails coming from lists.opensuse.org For example the the mails from lists using IPV4 addresses come from: 195.135.223.51 ( mx1.opensuse.org ) 195.135.223.52 ( mx2.opensuse.org ) these ip addresses are not in spf records of opensuse.org causing mails to fail SPF tests. also the SPF records are too permissive and ripe for spoofing and malicious use. However the mails from lists using IPV6 addresses come from: 2a07:de40:b27e:1209::12 ( mx2.infra.opensuse.org ) 2a07:de40:b27e:1209::11 ( mx1.infra.opensuse.org ) these ip address are in SPF record hence SPF test is passed when receiving mails from these addresses. The SPF record for opensuse.org is: v=spf1 include:_spf.opensuse.org ?all which expands to: v=spf1 ip4:91.193.113.64/27 ip4:143.186.213.0/24 ip4:147.2.0.0/16 ip4:149.44.0.0/16 ip6:2a01:138:a004::/64 ip6:2a07:de40:401::/64 a:smtp-out1.suse.de a:smtp-out2.suse.de a:mx1.infra.opensuse.org a:mx2.infra.opensuse.org mx ?all there is no mx1.opensuse.org/mx2.opensuse.org in SPF records. Further the “mx” entry in records is with respect to domain _spf.opensuse.org ( which doesn’t has a mx record ).this mx entry WILL NOT apply to opensuse.org domain. In summary i see 3 problems here. 1. inconsistencies in IPV4 and IPV6 Mail delivery. 2. incorrect SPF records. 3. Too permissive SPF is prone to abuse. Hope you guys will be able to fix it. Please pass it on to relevant people if this is not the right email address. Thanks admin akritrim AI

2 1

Status of the foundation?
by Martin Schröder 18 Aug '24

18 Aug '24

Hi, what's the status of the openSUSE foundation? Wikipedia has this: "The project is self-organized without a legal structure, although the establishment of a foundation has been under consideration for some time." citing an article from 2020(!). Best Martin

10 32

RE: Status of the foundation?
by Patrick Fitzgerald 13 Aug '24

13 Aug '24

-----Original message----- From: Björn Bidar <bjorn.bidar(a)thaodan.de> Sent: Friday 9th August 2024 0:07 To: Patrick Fitzgerald <patrickf(a)i-layer.com> Cc: project(a)lists.opensuse.org Subject: Re: Status of the foundation? Patrick Fitzgerald <patrickf(a)i-layer.com> writes: > Hi Attila, > > As a result of questions asked elsewhere (and here), I have further > information in relation to the questions you have raised here. > > Firstly: I do not have more than 75% of the voting rights as suggested > below. That was the case /at the time/ of forming the not-for-profit > foundation, as someone has to do it - take a look at the "Filing > history" tab at [1], there you can see that the link that you > provided is dated 14 February 2023. Was it already decided where this entity would be based? Other's such as for example KDE have a German e.V. entity. After I prepared a feasibility report for the board, I decided to just the create the foundation in the UK, as it could be done there with little up front cost. I determined that it would better to have something now rather continued discussions about potential names, locations, memberships and so on. As a result, we now have a Not for Profit Corporation, (soon to become Registered UK Charity), banking, insurance, and accounting functions. We are working on how to provide infrastructure, on a global basis, with some of the largest providers in the world. We have been sponsors at numerous events. Money, which was previously held* because there was no where for it to go - (who wants to donate money to a public company? * ) is now in the in the hands of the Geeko Foundation. SUSE are channelling their Travel Support directly to us, and we are receiving donations on a weekly, sometimes a daily basis, directly from the events we attend (FOSDEM alone raised about €1000), from the geekos.org website, and from the sponsorship links in the Welcome app. But back to your point - my sources said that it would have required €25000 in front up capital, plus legal costs, to establish the appropriate organisation in Germany. In the UK it was about £100.00. The location should not be an issue (though we planning on creating a 501(c)3 in the US and similar somewhere in the EU), simply because focusing on location will lead you to recreate the same infra in every country... making it all unmanageable. * From memory, every t-shirt that was sold "earned" openSUSE €5.00. But it was kept in the distributors account because "openSUSE" was just a name - with no bank account. Those funds were the first to arrive. > > At the same time, /articles of association/ where adopted, in which > the rules that the govern the organisation are defined. > Following that date two more trustees were appointed. All of us have > to abide by the articles of association, by law. You can view the > entire articles of association on the last link of the filing history > link above. > > The three community members have devoted a great deal of time to set > up a foundation with the sole purpose of benefiting the entire > community. We have been open every step of the way and continue to be > so. We welcome all comments and constructive feedback so that we may > shape a foundation that works for everyone. If any additional > clarification is wanted or required, we are here for the entire > community. > > We are happy to set up a call to address any questions that the > community may have. In the meantime, we remain at the community's > disposal and can be reached on Telegram at https://t.me/geekos_org > anytime. > > Also, FWIW, it doesn't have to be called the Geeko Foundation - the > domain name was available so I grabbed it! Personally I would prefer if the foundation could keep/take the openSUSE name since IMHO better if the issues between openSUSE and SUSE get resolved. That would be nice, but in my opinion, with assistance (ie, marketing) from SUSE it might be better to have a different name, whilst keeping the "product names". Two things that I have noticed in every openSUSE booth that I have attended in the last two years are: * "Oh yes! SUSE! Wow, you know, I used to use that in my early days..." (but not more, and they move on) * "openSUSE? What's that... is it related to SUSE?" (This triggers a discussion of what the differences are, not what the offering actually is, and then they move on.) There is clearly confusion out there in the world about what the differences are. openSUSE was and is a springboard to SUSE as SLE from my point of view, the relation or base is there but they targeted to different audiences. 100% agreed. Perhaps Leap could be "Leap, donated by SUSE" for example. (or "powered by"?) However another name would fit given the relation of the origin of SUSE and thus openSUSE would be to name the foundation after Konrad Zuse, a German computer pioneer. But after thinking a bit even thou from openSUSE to openZUSE sounds kinda funny it is not that good. I'm pretty sure that that would violate some trademarks as well... ;) Loosing the SUSE name in openSUSE would be a major recognition factor loss, from a German/EU point of view that is. As above re Leap. It doesn't have to be that way, it isn't like SUSE would be abandoning the community. > Best regards - Patrick > > [1] > https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14662457 > > On 08/07/2024 03:50, Attila Pinter wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I found that the talk Shawn linked[1] to didn't address many of my >> questions. Since I couldn't attend the conference, I'm raising them >> here. Please note that these questions are not criticisms of the >> foundation or any of its trustees. They are simply checks and >> balances inquiries, as I couldn't find information addressing these >> concerns. While talk is cheap, written communication provides >> clarity ;) >> >> Firstly, has the foundation established an agreement with the Board >> to act as a financial vehicle for the project? Is there a Memorandum >> of Understanding (MoU) that the Board members or the Chairman have >> signed, confirming that the Geekos Foundation can and should fulfill >> this role? >> >> The foundation has been active for over a year, yet we haven't seen >> much information from the Board recognizing the Geekos Foundation as >> the official foundation of the project. Why is that? If the >> foundation is indeed recognized as the official foundation for the >> project, this should be communicated clearly by the Board. >> >> Additionally, where can we find the annual reports of the >> foundation? Even if the foundation hasn't managed any funds since it >> was established, a report should still be released, as I believe - >> but could be wrong - this is required by law. >> >> Is there a document that clearly defines the roles and boundaries of >> the foundation? For example, can it fund development requested by a >> sponsor, or can it cease funding projects similarly? Who decides >> where the funds go? Are these voted upon by the trustees? >> >> Lastly, I noticed that Patrick holds 75% of the voting power[2] in the foundation. Is there a reason for this, whether legal or otherwise? >> >> -- >> Br, >> A. >> >> 1:https://media.ccc.de/v/4091-everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-geekos-but-didn-t-think-to-ask >> 2:https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14662457/persons-with-significant-control

5 13

openSUSE Tuesday Marketing meeting 6/8-2024
by Luna Jernberg 13 Aug '24

13 Aug '24

Hey! i will attend todays meeting

4 7

Re: openSUSE Tuesday Marketing meeting 6/8-2024
by Patrick Fitzgerald 13 Aug '24

13 Aug '24

Doug is on vacation until next monday i think, and i dont think I received the invite either... On 13 Aug 2024 16:33, Robert Sirchia <robert.sirchia(a)suse.com> wrote: Hello, I am not sure if I got the invite let me follow up with Doug and get on the schedule. On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 10:30 AM Luna Jernberg <droidbittin(a)gmail.com <mailto:droidbittin@gmail.com> > wrote: Joined today too, but the Tuesday meetings has been pretty empty the past two times i had time to join Den tis 6 aug. 2024 kl 13:59 skrev Luna Jernberg <droidbittin(a)gmail.com <mailto:droidbittin@gmail.com> >: > > Hey! > > i will attend todays meeting -- Robert Sirchia Director of Technical & Community Marketing SUSE 1.216.577.1943 www.suse.com <http://www.suse.com>

1 0

RE: RE: Status of the foundation?
by Patrick Fitzgerald 13 Aug '24

13 Aug '24

What is there to be gained by setting up a new foundation? Just asking. -----Original message----- From: Sarah Julia Kriesch <ada.lovelace(a)gmx.de> Sent: Friday 9th August 2024 15:53 To: Patrick Fitzgerald <patrickf(a)i-layer.com> Cc: Björn Bidar <bjorn.bidar(a)thaodan.de>; project(a)lists.opensuse.org Subject: Aw: RE: Status of the foundation? Hi Patrick, A "general" GmbH costs around 25.000Euros in Germany. But there is also the possibility of founding a "Mini GmbH". That exists also as "gemeinnützig" (charity in English). Founding costs are 1Euro. Here is an example article: https://fzf.de/ug-haftungsbeschraenkt-gmbh-ggmbh/ If we achieve a capital about 25.000Euros, the Mini GmbH will be transferrred to a gGmbH then. The study foundation, where I reveived the money from during my Bachelor studies was also a gGmbH (gemeinnützige GmbH). Best regards, Sarah Gesendet: Freitag, 09. August 2024 um 14:08 Uhr Von: "Patrick Fitzgerald" <patrickf(a)i-layer.com> An: "Björn Bidar" <bjorn.bidar(a)thaodan.de> Cc: "project(a)lists.opensuse.org" <project(a)lists.opensuse.org> Betreff: RE: Status of the foundation? -----Original message----- From: Björn Bidar <bjorn.bidar(a)thaodan.de> Sent: Friday 9th August 2024 0:07 To: Patrick Fitzgerald <patrickf(a)i-layer.com> Cc: project(a)lists.opensuse.org Subject: Re: Status of the foundation? Patrick Fitzgerald <patrickf(a)i-layer.com> writes: > Hi Attila, > > As a result of questions asked elsewhere (and here), I have further > information in relation to the questions you have raised here. > > Firstly: I do not have more than 75% of the voting rights as suggested > below. That was the case /at the time/ of forming the not-for-profit > foundation, as someone has to do it - take a look at the "Filing > history" tab at [1], there you can see that the link that you > provided is dated 14 February 2023. Was it already decided where this entity would be based? Other's such as for example KDE have a German e.V. entity. After I prepared a feasibility report for the board, I decided to just the create the foundation in the UK, as it could be done there with little up front cost. I determined that it would better to have something now rather continued discussions about potential names, locations, memberships and so on. As a result, we now have a Not for Profit Corporation, (soon to become Registered UK Charity), banking, insurance, and accounting functions. We are working on how to provide infrastructure, on a global basis, with some of the largest providers in the world. We have been sponsors at numerous events. Money, which was previously held* because there was no where for it to go - (who wants to donate money to a public company? * ) is now in the in the hands of the Geeko Foundation. SUSE are channelling their Travel Support directly to us, and we are receiving donations on a weekly, sometimes a daily basis, directly from the events we attend (FOSDEM alone raised about €1000), from the geekos.org website, and from the sponsorship links in the Welcome app. But back to your point - my sources said that it would have required €25000 in front up capital, plus legal costs, to establish the appropriate organisation in Germany. In the UK it was about £100.00. The location should not be an issue (though we planning on creating a 501(c)3 in the US and similar somewhere in the EU), simply because focusing on location will lead you to recreate the same infra in every country... making it all unmanageable. * From memory, every t-shirt that was sold "earned" openSUSE €5.00. But it was kept in the distributors account because "openSUSE" was just a name - with no bank account. Those funds were the first to arrive. > > At the same time, /articles of association/ where adopted, in which > the rules that the govern the organisation are defined. > Following that date two more trustees were appointed. All of us have > to abide by the articles of association, by law. You can view the > entire articles of association on the last link of the filing history > link above. > > The three community members have devoted a great deal of time to set > up a foundation with the sole purpose of benefiting the entire > community. We have been open every step of the way and continue to be > so. We welcome all comments and constructive feedback so that we may > shape a foundation that works for everyone. If any additional > clarification is wanted or required, we are here for the entire > community. > > We are happy to set up a call to address any questions that the > community may have. In the meantime, we remain at the community's > disposal and can be reached on Telegram at https://t.me/geekos_org > anytime. > > Also, FWIW, it doesn't have to be called the Geeko Foundation - the > domain name was available so I grabbed it! Personally I would prefer if the foundation could keep/take the openSUSE name since IMHO better if the issues between openSUSE and SUSE get resolved. That would be nice, but in my opinion, with assistance (ie, marketing) from SUSE it might be better to have a different name, whilst keeping the "product names". Two things that I have noticed in every openSUSE booth that I have attended in the last two years are: * "Oh yes! SUSE! Wow, you know, I used to use that in my early days..." (but not more, and they move on) * "openSUSE? What's that... is it related to SUSE?" (This triggers a discussion of what the differences are, not what the offering actually is, and then they move on.) There is clearly confusion out there in the world about what the differences are. openSUSE was and is a springboard to SUSE as SLE from my point of view, the relation or base is there but they targeted to different audiences. 100% agreed. Perhaps Leap could be "Leap, donated by SUSE" for example. (or "powered by"?) However another name would fit given the relation of the origin of SUSE and thus openSUSE would be to name the foundation after Konrad Zuse, a German computer pioneer. But after thinking a bit even thou from openSUSE to openZUSE sounds kinda funny it is not that good. I'm pretty sure that that would violate some trademarks as well... ;) Loosing the SUSE name in openSUSE would be a major recognition factor loss, from a German/EU point of view that is. As above re Leap. It doesn't have to be that way, it isn't like SUSE would be abandoning the community. > Best regards - Patrick > > [1] > https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14662457 > > On 08/07/2024 03:50, Attila Pinter wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I found that the talk Shawn linked[1] to didn't address many of my >> questions. Since I couldn't attend the conference, I'm raising them >> here. Please note that these questions are not criticisms of the >> foundation or any of its trustees. They are simply checks and >> balances inquiries, as I couldn't find information addressing these >> concerns. While talk is cheap, written communication provides >> clarity ;) >> >> Firstly, has the foundation established an agreement with the Board >> to act as a financial vehicle for the project? Is there a Memorandum >> of Understanding (MoU) that the Board members or the Chairman have >> signed, confirming that the Geekos Foundation can and should fulfill >> this role? >> >> The foundation has been active for over a year, yet we haven't seen >> much information from the Board recognizing the Geekos Foundation as >> the official foundation of the project. Why is that? If the >> foundation is indeed recognized as the official foundation for the >> project, this should be communicated clearly by the Board. >> >> Additionally, where can we find the annual reports of the >> foundation? Even if the foundation hasn't managed any funds since it >> was established, a report should still be released, as I believe - >> but could be wrong - this is required by law. >> >> Is there a document that clearly defines the roles and boundaries of >> the foundation? For example, can it fund development requested by a >> sponsor, or can it cease funding projects similarly? Who decides >> where the funds go? Are these voted upon by the trustees? >> >> Lastly, I noticed that Patrick holds 75% of the voting power[2] in the foundation. Is there a reason for this, whether legal or otherwise? >> >> -- >> Br, >> A. >> >> 1:https://media.ccc.de/v/4091-everything-you-wanted-to-know-about-geekos-but-didn-t-think-to-ask >> 2:https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14662457/persons-with-significant-control

5 9

TSP for openSUSE Conference 2024
by ddemaio openSUSE 06 Aug '24

06 Aug '24

Hi all, We will not be accepting any more TSP requests for the openSUSE Conference 2024. We've had a large amount of requests and will do our best to accommodate those that have already been submitted requests. If you know any companies that would like to sponsor the conference, please have them view the prospectus at https://en.opensuse.org/images/f/f6/OSC24prospectus.pdf or people can also donate at https://geekos.org/sponsorship/ to assist with more travel support. v/r Doug

2 1

openSUSE Board minutes 2024-07-08
by ddemaio openSUSE 02 Aug '24

02 Aug '24

Board Meeting Monday 2024-07-08 14:00 CEST Present: Doug, Gerald, Neal, Simon, Shawn, Patrick Missed: Guests: From Previous Meetings We never made a formal decision on the policies for Permanent bans. Syncing after openSUSE Conference Shawn could not attend in person Gerald attended on Thursday, then sick and stuck in bed the following days :-( Those present in person report many constructive discussions. Talk generally perceived well. Only one member noting "If the name changes I'll leave". Several raised a desire to consider alternate names to "Geeko(s)". General feedback at the event was people were fine with renaming part of the talk at oSC24, less so with a removing the commuity brand outlook and splitting up the projects Discord/Matrix/IRC feedback has generally been ambivalent. A fair bit of narrative of "being forced" by SUSE. It seems that there is enough positive desire within the community to a good extent since this shouldn't just be the board driving proposals. It seems that more contributors are open to the idea of changing then the general userbase, at the same time there are some more SUSE employees that are less likely to want to change. Board to await the maturation period for the community to discuss before moving forward with a planning/phased approach Action Item: Gerald, statement from the board after discussion dies down.

6 11