-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 06/16/2015 06:07 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
Don't have the time to comment on this whole thread (seriously? yet another long post...dude! ;)) but I do have two points I want to make very quickly
1. I think talking about naming anything is premature until we know what the landscape is going to be.
Really? When do we ever know the landscape. Until oSC15 most people were most likely under the impression that we'd have openSUSE 13.3 late this year as a snapshot of Factory. The per-announcement at FOSDEM and some other rumors beforehand can certainly not, under any serious circumstances, be considered as an indicator for major upheaval to the release. Thus, I would say we really do not know the landscape, ever, until things actually happen. What we do know is that our release manager has announced that he will work on a distribution/release that is based on openSUSE:42 and thus I would say we can all pretty much infer from that that our current release manager will not have the time, energy, or interest to also work on "openSUSE Factory-based". This decision is from my point of view sufficient to come to terms about what the child should be named. If history is any indication we know that when Stephan puts his mind to something it is going to happen. Even in the most uncertain times somehow there was a release. Kudos to Stephan for all his hard work and dedication to the project, I doubt this will change. And during the times of the openSUSE team Kudos to their hard work on the release as well. Therefore, I would say it is a fair expectation that there will be a distribution ready for release based on :42. I am really not certain how much more of the landscape we need to know to give the child a name.
Right now, we have Tumbleweed and the beginnings of a new Regular Release which is currently codenamed openSUSE:42.
While there is obviously some people who would prefer to keep with the old way of distribution releases, we haven't seen anyone step up to actually do the work to continue that approach.
And why would that have to be right this minute? If it happens next year would you rather rename the new "regular" release again? Or have another naming discussion? Or worse discourage such potential efforts by saying the new child is called "openSUSE XY.z" and that's that? There should be the idea of putting things on equal footing to provide our users with the choice they desire and provide our contributors with the opportunities they deserve. Many things are implied by a name and this choice is important, IMHO.
I think the suggestion to maintain the openSUSE name only for the current-style of Regular release is foolish if there is no sign of that way of doing things continuing.
Well, one can call many things foolish. I guess trying to come up with a reasonable solution that considers many different concerns now falls into that category as well. By the way I did not propose to reserve the current naming for a potential future effort, I proposed to abandon it in favor of providing multiple efforts equal footing for equal naming rights. Maybe that is the foolish part. Please explain where the problem lies if it is called "openSUSE Forest" and there is no third distribution? Later, Robert - -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU Public Cloud Architect LINUX rjschwei@suse.com IRC: robjo -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVgM/1AAoJEE4FgL32d2Ukxe8IAIrMWREfldbpwMSWL5f7pek/ SAf064lhlxXHJmlOfQxqhD6NZxlXVjzHpILwrELpP4Cmnn+OK4FgAPPRb2xPXGz5 9z5CdtKpcPY4oq8DQMnFQDM8wDOG0NUA5+Gnc9iWFiraq9JmZ2WOJu7M6x07Ae00 yErJ1Kg1wak3Xupp4WI8+tV1vN4iWg9zOiuy+M9Gb2Yxs0e3G+jqV+VwCzhaJQOM NsyItzVTyALrt4nh9oWs5qUOqvrPVEhPjZV2uKNpkmLu7g7uag+XQpldUDXR4YCC bPlAShCOI3trEIPl+eiYNuvFuod9cDtzr6Lbmtm2iZTUX5qq+oANIWDinJyiLIg= =N7lg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org