Hello, Am Montag, 15. Juli 2024, 03:13:33 MESZ schrieb Knurpht-openSUSE:
Op zondag 14 juli 2024 21:38:38 CEST schreef Christian Boltz:
Am Freitag, 12. Juli 2024, 21:50:55 MESZ schrieb Knurpht-openSUSE:
- Whether we like it or not, we have to rebrand the Project.
Who says that?
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 won't force you to reveal anything, but it's hard to tell the difference between some undisclosed sources and things made out of thin air. I tend to believe such "sources" on the same level as I believe rumors, which usually means "not at all". Also, Simon's answer has made it very clear how "good" your source must be. That said - Seife's undisclosed sources sound very valid ;-)
So far, the rebranding has been called a "proposal", and questions what exactly that means are either unanwered, or got answers as clear as mud. The only thing that was made slightly more clear (clear as muddy water?) was that SUSE won't force us.
So please stop claiming that we _have to_.
IMHO the rebranding is a terribly bad idea which will cause lots of problems and damage. Therefore we should decline that proposal and keep openSUSE as our name.
Rather wait until we have to? If we want to be "independent" as some of the others said in the other threads, we'd have to anyway.
I doubt that being independent (BTW, it's interesting that you use quotes around that word) has anything to do with replacing the letters S, U and E in our name.
We can start working on it now and be proactive, or later be forced by f.e. some new owner of SUSE ( mind, SUSE has expressed their concern about such a thing happening and clearly stated that they do not want to get rid of the Project. ).
This can be solved, for example with a contract between SUSE and the Geeko Foundation that would transfer the openSUSE trademark if SUSE (or a future new owner) ever does "stupid things"[tm] [1].
So if current SUSE management is indeed in favor of openSUSE, it should be an easy decision for them to sign such a contract to prevent possible future damage.
In comparison to the effort and pain a rebranding would cause, such a contract would be a much easier (and even much cheaper) solution.
Again, investigating our options now is better than wait-and-see, wouldn't you agree?
No, because the option we "should" investigate means lots of work and lots of foreseeable problems, with the best-possible (but unlikely) result of "not much damage done", and some worst-case results I don't even want to imagine ("Who on earth is that $newname distro? Never heard of them!") To make things worse, all that is based on statements that are as clear as mud, and feel like FUD spread by a small number of people. OTOH, wait and see - and accepting the risk that we _might_ have to act in 5, 10 or 100 years - avoids all the foreseeable and very real issues a rebrand will cause. And who knows, maybe a future owner of SUSE is a big fan of openSUSE and fulfils all our dreams. I know nobody mentioned this option before, but it's as likely or unlikely as the worst-case option. If you look around in the news, companies very rarely change their name, because they know that it's extremely hard and can cause lots of damage. The few rebrands I've seen so far were because these companies had completely f***ed up before, and hoped that people wouldn't recognize them under their new name, and wouldn't remember all the evil things they did before. I don't think that openSUSE belongs to that category. To summarize it in a completely different way: No, I will not move to a tent and call a demolition company to pull down my house, just because every day some houses in germany burn down. Instead, I will wait and see, accept the (small) risk and stay in the house. And no, I don't even consider a camping trailer to be a sane alternative. (Did I mention that a storm just blew away a tent?)
- A vote on the Project logo has already been done, and was won by our LCP, no need to do that again. The people maintaining the distros have accepted LCP's logos as their distro logo, so using the same design for the Project makes sense since it gives a nice consistency. Wrong.
Yes, we had a logo vote, but that vote was so broken and problematic that it caused lots of discussions on the mailinglist.
Just to mention the most important points:
Our current logo was not offered as an option - which was the cause for most of the mailinglist discussion. The idea not to include it was already a bad idea, but at least the rules said it would have been included if someone submits it.
Well, our current logo actually _was_ submitted by LCP - who later also complained on the mailinglist that it wasn't included.
This also means that the only useful result of the logo vote was: _If_ we change the logo, it will be the one that won the vote.
Back then, we got a promise that there will be a membership vote to decide if we want the new logo, or if we prefer to keep our current logo. That was a nice way to stop the discussions - but needless to say that this membership vote never happened.
And now you claim that "A vote on the Project logo has already been done, and was won by our LCP, no need to do that again."
Seriously?''
Where did I say that vote should not happen ? It is an open letter to all of you, nothing else. LCP's logos did win by far, and all I was saying is that we don't need a **new** logo vote. If the community wants to vote yes/no to replacing it, fine. But a new logo contest? No.
That's an interesting[tm] way of interpreting what you wrote in your previous mail, but it's not what you had written. You wrote that "A vote on the Project logo has already been done, [...] no need to do this again" - and there was not the smallest indication that you'd consider a(nother) logo vote. Of course you could argue that you didn't explicitely write that you are against a "current vs new logo" vote, but "no need to do this again" is more than clear and doesn't leave lots of room for speculation or interpretation. Just to be clear: The question if the community wants a vote about current vs. new logo was answered in that discussion with a very clear "yes". The mail flood only stopped when we got the promise that such a vote will happen. Feel free to re-read the (IIRC) 100+ mails on this topic if you don't believe me. Regards, Christian Boltz -- ah, sie haben einen doktortitel. in welchem fach haben sie denn plagiiert? [barfman auf http://ahoipolloi.blogger.de/stories/1844699/]