On 7/15/24 5:53 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 2024-07-15 10:16, Simon Lees wrote:
On 7/15/24 5:20 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 2024-07-15 09:41, Simon Lees wrote:
On 7/15/24 4:52 PM, Richard Brown wrote:
On 2024-07-15 04:25, Simon Lees wrote:
On 7/15/24 10:43 AM, Knurpht-openSUSE wrote:
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.
I'll just say that personally I 100% agree with this, which is why in 2019 I didn't think the name change was a great idea but now I'm pushing for it. Also why i've been actively pushing the discussion around changes to the governance.
At the same time to be 100% clear that doesn't change the fact that SUSE has NOT communicated to the board that the project MUST change its name.
Sure, it doesn't change the fact, but I would hope my context could change the implication that fact carries.
"SUSE has not communicated to the Board that the project MUST change its name" can mean multiple things. Some examples that spring to mind:
1. SUSE doesn't really care if openSUSE changes its name 2. SUSE wants openSUSE to change it's name, but doesn't think pushing that through the Board is a nice way to do that 3. SUSE wants openSUSE to change it's name, but doesn't think the Board is an effective governing body 4. SUSE wants openSUSE to change it's name, but prefers to engage directly with the community-at-large.
I think #1 is highly unlikely, if not impossible - far too much work went into putting the request together.
I think either, #2, #3, or #4 (or more likely a combination of all three) are more likely to be factors.
Given that SUSE has chosen to approach and communicate with the board before the community I'm going to disagree with some of your assessment here aside from point #1. But given i'd prefer us see some changes to the governance structure as well i'm not going to waste any more time arguing about it.
If you mean to suggest that my presence at the Board meeting before oSC was "SUSE" choosing to approach and communicate with the Board I have to clear something up
No, SUSE has been communicating with the board since long before your presentation to us during our face to face and continued to communicate with us in the period after your presentation and before the conference. -- 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