RE: Open Letter to the openSUSE Board, Project and Community (Final)

On 2024-07-15 04:25, Simon Lees wrote:
> On 7/15/24 10:43 AM, Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:

>> Sources I will and cannot reveal. What was told to me confidebntially 
>> stays
>> with me until I;m told I can share it. Don't blame the messenger for 
>> the
>> message.
> 
> I'm also not sure who your source is, but the information they have
> given you does not reflect the information that was last given to the
> board from SUSE. Who to make it clear are not forcing us to rebrand
> the project.

I think anyone focusing on whether or not SUSE is, will, or could 
"force" openSUSE to do anything is missing the whole point

SUSE is an organisation that enables openSUSE to do far more than SUSE 
needs openSUSE to do.
SUSE actively provides resources to openSUSE above and beyond what SUSE 
clearly needs to improve their business.

This status quo is built upon good will.
Good will isn't fostered by either party throwing around threats or 
making firm demands.

The fact is, SUSE have formally, calmly, and quite nicely, asked 
openSUSE to stop using the SUSE brand.

If we as a community fail to work productively with that request, then 
we will be choosing to decrease the good will between SUSE and openSUSE.

I would expect that choice would not lead to SUSE escalating matters to 
get their own way, I don't see that as the "SUSE way" of doing things.
What I would imagine is an outcome that's would actually far worse - 
Apathy and a tendency to put priorities elsewhere.

A huge amount of what openSUSE excels at is facilitated by SUSE either 
giving openSUSE more than SUSE would otherwise need, or SUSE turning a 
blind eye and supporting it's employees when they give extra 
contributions to openSUSE during work time than the business would 
otherwise need.

Any decrease in good will between SUSE and openSUSE puts those sort of 
contributions at risk.

And sure, there are policies like "Factory first" that do directly 
foster direct engineering links between openSUSE and SUSE. But I do not 
think openSUSE should take them for granteded.

It's not like openSUSE is the only Project/Community that SUSE fosters 
around it's products.
SUSE Manager has Uyuni, Rancher has Rancher.
If openSUSE demonstrates it's not aligned with SUSE's interests, then I 
expect SUSE to focus its efforts on open source projects that are 
aligned.
SUSE will adapt to protect it's business, and this Project will need to 
adjust to a reality of less good will from all levels of the SUSE 
hierarchy.

The same goes for the discussions regarding Governance.
At oSC you had SUSE senior managers, budget holders, speak up, in 
public, saying that they felt this Project's governance has issues that 
need to be addressed.
One of them has even come to this list and elaborated on that view.

SUSE doesn't want history to record that it was the big mean corporation 
that forced its community to do something.
But just because things are being said nicely doesn't mean they should 
be ignored.

Infact..aren't we meant to be a community? Aren't we meant to respond 
positively when people ask us to do stuff nicely?

Ultimately, I believe that if openSUSE continues to travel in a 
direction that hinders the SUSE brand, or ignores the need to address 
it's governance issues, we need to be prepared for history recording 
that openSUSE drove itself to obsolescence by failing to listen to the 
needs of one of its largest stakeholders.

I'd rather we avoid such a fate and refocus this discussion. Like Andy's 
presentation implied when it says "We're all grown up..", let's act like 
adults, we've got stuff to do.