Am Freitag, 17. Juli 2015, 11:13:26 schrieb Martin Schlander:

Torsdag den 16. juli 2015 18:17:24 skrev Jay:

...

So I took a look at Leap again. When using the latest LTS-kernel

...

with the SUSE-packages, it has the following features/benefits: Some of these are questionable.

...

- hard to beat stability - continuity through long-term-support

Already a lot of SLE core packages are being replaced (kernel, qt, gtk, gnome, alsa, pulseaudio). Imagine how it will be in 42.2 and 42.3.

I guess in the end the added "stability" and "continuity" will be limited to systemd, the LAMP stack, GNU utils and maybe YaST. Everything else will have the same stability as before or worse, because the packages are tested more on Tumbleweed, than they will be on Leap.

"worse" would be bad indeed.

Also there's a big question mark about how the service packs will be announced and installed. The way things are looking to me the, the user will need to keep track of service pack releases himself. And then either download an ISO and upgrade with that, or manually switch repos to 42.2 and zypper dup every 12 months (maybe the YaST Wagon module will be usable?). Upgrading the desktop environment and all applications to new and changed versions. I'm not sure desktop users will perceive that as continuity, even if systemd and some other base packages don't change. Compare that e.g. to running 13.2 for 26 months, with nothing really changing.

For server users the service packs will probably be less disruptive, so they might experience some continuity, even if they need to "distupgrade" every 12 months. But it's a complicated thing to communicate to them I think.

Your'e painting a rather grim picture here. Hope this doesn't come true. I supposed those things would already be clear at this stage.

For me there are too many open questions to even begin considering a strategy for how to market Leap.

But it's about time if Leap is to be launched at the beginning of November. That's why I wrote this thing. Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am Samstag, 18. Juli 2015, 11:35:56 schrieb Bruno Friedmann:

ps : this is a repost to the public ml, where my first send should have been gone. (Jay/Reiner) could you ask your mail program to not trick the reply-to when writing to opensuse ml, so everybody that click on reply will have the correct field? ;-))

I'm using KMail. But I couldn't find an option to fulfill your wish! No idea. Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am Freitag, 17. Juli 2015, 14:50:04 schrieb Richard Brown:

On 16 July 2015 at 18:17, Jay wrote:

...

The baby's got a name now and a good solution for hardware- support (kernel) seems to have been found.

So I've been thinking a bit about how we might finally position Leap and also use this as the USP (Unique Selling Proposition).

In positioning one has to consider what the target-user may value, what the product offers and of course the competition.

I think we roughly know what our target-users like and what other major distros are doing.

So I took a look at Leap again. When using the latest LTS-kernel

with the SUSE-packages, it has the following features/benefits: - hard to beat stability - continuity through long-term-support - pretty up-to-date hardware-support - up-to-date yet stable user-software

Obviously, Leap has a strong stability/continuity-attribute and a somewhat less-strong "up-to-date"-attribute.

Now for the hard part: how to summarize this without writing an article?

The name "Leap 42.1" already does part of the job. Stability and continuity can be merged into "reliability". For lack of a better idea, I called the "up-to-date"-attribute just that.

And this leads to my proposal for positioning Leap 42.1 as: > The Up-to-date Reliability Release <

AFAIK no other major distro offers the same combination.

So the USP would be: The only Up-to-date Reliability Release

"Up-to-date Reliability Release" is a new expression (as is "Reliability Release") and AFAIK no other major distribution so far has made that claim.

As Leap would be the first to do so, chances are good that after a while of consistent communication Leap would own this position in the users mind.

Any thoughts? "Up-to-date" too strong? Could we stand by that claim also in the long run?

Thanks for starting the conversation. I like the train of thought

My thoughts about our 'USP' with Leap always seem to fall on the same phrase

"The Best of Both Worlds", which isn't just the title of my favourite Star Trek TNG double-bill, but a good descriptor of what Leap brings to the table that no other distribution has

A combination of both Enterprise packages and stability, and community innovations, integrated, tested, and distributed as a single distribution.

I think that describing it more along those lines should hopefully lead us to better reflect what we're really offering

"The Best of Both Worlds" would be less concrete and need a little more explanation but would also be less vulnerable (esp. with resp. to "up-to- date"). "Leap 42.1 - The Best of Both Worlds". Looks good to me! I think we already got a slogan (and a USP). Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 17:44:36 +0200, jdd wrote:

...

"The Best of Both Worlds", which isn't just the title of my favourite Star Trek TNG double-bill, but a good descriptor of what Leap brings to the table that no other distribution has

but what worlds? windows and apple?

"With goals of being up-to-date and reliable, openSUSE Leap 42.1 brings the best of both worlds." Though I don't know how well "up-to-date" translates; it would be better to have a single word rather than a hyphenated phrase to describe the idea. But by talking early on in building "brand recognition" for Leap and tying the name to the ideas of having current software and being reliable, eventually you should be able to talk just about the "best of both worlds" and have people generally know that that's what you mean. But without that, I agree with jdd here - that if you specify just "The best of both worlds", you might make people think that you were talking about, for example, the Linux and Windows worlds coming together. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am Freitag, 17. Juli 2015, 17:37:37 schrieb Jim Henderson:

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 17:44:36 +0200, jdd wrote:

...

...

"The Best of Both Worlds", which isn't just the title of my favourite Star Trek TNG double-bill, but a good descriptor of what Leap brings to the table that no other distribution has

but what worlds? windows and apple?

"With goals of being up-to-date and reliable, openSUSE Leap 42.1 brings the best of both worlds."

Though I don't know how well "up-to-date" translates; it would be better to have a single word rather than a hyphenated phrase to describe the idea.

Sure. But which one? Current/recent/actual? I was even thinking of "cool" but in the end I wasn't really happy with any of those. So I resorted to "up-to-date" which is a quite familiar term. Not optimal but at least straight to the point. ;)

But by talking early on in building "brand recognition" for Leap and tying the name to the ideas of having current software and being reliable, eventually you should be able to talk just about the "best of both worlds" and have people generally know that that's what you mean.

Yep. But "The Up-to-date Reliability Release" (URR) puts more emphasis on being "current" which includes hardware-support. That's why for URR to work the latest LTS-kernel would be essential. Being more current would set Leap apart from Debian, Centos and other LTS-"stability"-releases. Richard Brown's idea of "Best of both worlds" puts more emphasis on "community-innovations" - if I understand him correctly. And this might work without the LTS-kernel.

But without that, I agree with jdd here - that if you specify just "The best of both worlds", you might make people think that you were talking about, for example, the Linux and Windows worlds coming together.

Jim

That's up to Richard to comment on. But perhaps we should just say "Leap 42.1 - The Best of ALL Worlds!" ;) Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Le 17/07/2015 22:45, Richard Brown a écrit :

"The Best of Both Worlds" refers to the Enterprise-provided and Community-provided sources which we build Leap

I don't see how that could possibly be construed to include Windows,

because for most of the computer users, "world" is not related to up-to-date or stable that are not that different. windows, ma and linux are, computer speaking, differrent world it's the word "world" that is undefined, not the others :-) how can we define stable, but still in touch with modern hardware? jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

W dniu 18.07.2015 o 00:20, Jim Henderson pisze:

Something like:

Enterprise + Community = The Best of Both Worlds openSUSE Leap 42.1

as a banner ad or something like that. That gets the idea implanted so that later communications, you can depend on a large enough segment of the user population having equated "Enterprise + Community" with "The Best of Both Worlds" as messaging.

I also like this emphasis on both enterprise and community. On the other hand using stability or being up to date as the main messages will cause some problems after a couple of releases, when e.g. some bug gets into the release (which happens from time to time, e.g. 13.1 had a bug that prevented successful install on certain pretty new dell laptops with broadcom wifi, and there was an issue with keyboard layouts), or some exotic packages won't be in the newest versions (which happens all the time), etc. Then users will complain, and trolls will use this as their weapon. I'm only saying - it's better to be careful with promises. -- Łukasz "Cyber Killer" Korpalski mail: cyberkiller8@gmail.com xmpp: cyber_killer@jabster.pl site: http://website.cybkil.cu.cc gpgkey: 0x72511999 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net //When replying to my e-mail, kindly please //write your message below the quoted text.

Am Samstag, 18. Juli 2015, 07:32:42 schrieb Łukasz 'Cyber Killer' Korpalski:

W dniu 18.07.2015 o 00:20, Jim Henderson pisze:

...

Something like:

Enterprise + Community = The Best of Both Worlds openSUSE Leap 42.1

as a banner ad or something like that. That gets the idea implanted so that later communications, you can depend on a large enough segment of the user population having equated "Enterprise + Community" with "The Best of Both Worlds" as messaging.

I also like this emphasis on both enterprise and community.

I also like "Best of" because it is nice to say, rather non-binding and still suggests you get the "Best" of something. But my problem with it is that at the same time it's also ambiguous and a bit wishy-washy. IMO not concrete enough. - first: - What worlds? Let's make a thought-experiment. Imagine an advertisement or news article for Leap in a computer-magazine. What would the hurried reader think if he sees "Best of both worlds"? - second: - "Enterprise" - What exactly does that mean? What does it stand for? Is that really immediately clear? Is it stability? Commerce? Or what? - third: - "Community" - What exactly does that mean? Would that be immediately clear for everybody? Is it software? Facebook? And would it really communicate a benefit? A strong argument to switch to Leap? I have my doubts.

On the other hand using stability or being up to date as the main messages will cause some problems after a couple of releases, when e.g. some bug gets into the release (which happens from time to time, e.g. 13.1 had a bug that prevented successful install on certain pretty new dell laptops with broadcom wifi, and there was an issue with keyboard layouts), or some exotic packages won't be in the newest versions (which happens all the time), etc. Then users will complain, and trolls will use this as their weapon.

I'm only saying - it's better to be careful with promises.

As I've already said: Too late! Do you know what "42" stands for? ;) And "42.1" is even improved! ;) On a more serious note: Nobody expects a "perfect" product. Nor would we promise one. And it's a known fact that if you made a mistake and admit it and work hard to put it right as soon as possible, your customers will value your effort and like the product even more. Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am Freitag, 17. Juli 2015, 22:45:16 schrieb Richard Brown:

On 17 July 2015 at 22:02, Jay wrote:

...

Yep. But "The Up-to-date Reliability Release" (URR) puts more emphasis on being "current" which includes hardware-support. That's why for URR to work the latest LTS-kernel would be essential.

Being more current would set Leap apart from Debian, Centos and other LTS-"stability"-releases.

Richard Brown's idea of "Best of both worlds" puts more emphasis on "community-innovations" - if I understand him correctly. And this might work without the LTS-kernel.

First, I want to share some thoughts about the Kernel as this topic keeps on coming up :)

While it looks certain that Leap will have the 4.1 LTS Kernel because of the very valid reasons raised by everyone on these lists, I don't think it's safe to assume that every minor release of Leap will always jump to the latest LTS Kernel each time.

The current prediction is that we'll be doing a Leap release once per year (though that is broadly dependant on SUSE doing the same for SLE 12 service packs, which we understand is the intention)

If you look at https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html you'll see that a new Kernel is declared as an LTS some where between once every 6-13 months

So, while I think we COULD probably move kernel every year (if we're lucky with LTS kernel announcements), I don't think we necessarily SHOULD

I think we should make a sensible evaluation for each minor release what makes sense for us, as maintainers and users.

Reasonable.

Starting to build Leap with the 3.12 Kernel from 2013 in 2015 (and needing to be maintained until at least the end of '2016' which is not even guaranteed according to this published list) is clearly not the right decision for us

But sticking with the 4.1 kernel until the end of 2017 might be the right decision when we come around to making it 1 year from now.

And so, to the point at hand, what makes Leap unique, is exactly factors like that

We're not building a CentOS where the logical choice is to stick on the Kernel used in RHEL, no ifs, no buts

That's good and understood. But CentOs and Debian also score high on stability/continuity and so we have to make it clear that Leap is different. We can do that by pointing out that Leap is more "up-to-date" or by pointing out "great features". Or both ;)

But, nor are we building an Fedora/old-style openSUSE where every release will always automatically have the latest kernel without considering whether the choice is a worthwhile effort in terms of risk, stability & benefits to users.

That's why I like it!

That's the kind of thing I mean by the "best of both worlds", we can make something that fills a unique role in the Linux ecosystem, a distribution that provides both great stability, and great features.

...

...

But without that, I agree with jdd here - that if you specify just "The best of both worlds", you might make people think that you were talking about, for example, the Linux and Windows worlds coming together.

Jim

That's up to Richard to comment on.

But perhaps we should just say

"Leap 42.1 - The Best of ALL Worlds!" ;)

"The Best of Both Worlds" refers to the Enterprise-provided and Community-provided sources which we build Leap

I don't see how that could possibly be construed to include Windows, but if it did, then "The Best of All Worlds" is at least 33% worse as it would also include OS X

;)

Come on: Best of All Worlds is WORSE than Best of just meagre two Worlds? Think again! ;) Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am Freitag, 17. Juli 2015, 22:15:33 schrieb Jim Henderson:

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 22:02:39 +0200, Jay wrote:

...

Sure. But which one? Current/recent/actual? I was even thinking of "cool" but in the end I wasn't really happy with any of those.

Yeah - I had the same problem as I tried to come up with the right word, too.

...

So I resorted to "up-to-date" which is a quite familiar term. Not optimal but at least straight to the point. ;)

True.

...

...

But by talking early on in building "brand recognition" for Leap and tying the name to the ideas of having current software and being reliable, eventually you should be able to talk just about the "best of both worlds" and have people generally know that that's what you mean.

Yep. But "The Up-to-date Reliability Release" (URR) puts more emphasis on being "current" which includes hardware-support. That's why for URR to work the latest LTS-kernel would be essential.

Being more current would set Leap apart from Debian, Centos and other LTS-"stability"-releases.

Richard Brown's idea of "Best of both worlds" puts more emphasis on "community-innovations" - if I understand him correctly. And this might work without the LTS-kernel.

That it might. The trick with "up-to-date" (or whatever synonym is used) is that it needs to be clear that while it's got current software, it's not necessarily "bleeding-edge" current software.

True. The right wording is important. But there would be accompanying info. And I think those seeking bleeding-edge-experience don't belong to the target group. So disappointing one ore two of them wouldn't be so bad.

The goal, I think, is a good balance between high reliability without depending on having outdated packages to achieve that reliability (which is at least *part* of my issue with SLE, for example).

Until relatively recently, I was running SLES10 on a server here at home, but the farther along I got, the more difficult I found it to be to even build packages I needed because library dependencies couldn't be met without really gutting the entire set of current "stable" libraries.

So while it was incredibly stable, it was too inflexible for my needs.

I guess you'll be one of the first to leap to Leap! ;)

...

...

But without that, I agree with jdd here - that if you specify just "The best of both worlds", you might make people think that you were talking about, for example, the Linux and Windows worlds coming together.

Jim

That's up to Richard to comment on.

But perhaps we should just say

"Leap 42.1 - The Best of ALL Worlds!" ;) : :)

Jim

Greetings! Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am Samstag, 18. Juli 2015, 03:14:22 schrieb Jim Henderson:

On Sat, 18 Jul 2015 01:00:17 +0200, Jay wrote:

...

...

That it might. The trick with "up-to-date" (or whatever synonym is used) is that it needs to be clear that while it's got current software, it's not necessarily "bleeding-edge" current software.

True. The right wording is important. But there would be accompanying info. And I think those seeking bleeding-edge-experience don't belong to the target group. So disappointing one ore two of them wouldn't be so bad.

Agreed. But it helps us to make sure the wording limits the field of disappointed users to a handful rather than a segment who thought that "up-to-date" meant "bleeding edge". I'm guessing you won't disagree with that. :)

No. I mean: yes - I won't disagree. ;) Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Sat, 18 Jul 2015 15:48:37 -0500, Rick Chung wrote:

On Saturday, July 18, 2015 12:03:45 PM Jay wrote:

...

Am Samstag, 18. Juli 2015, 03:14:22 schrieb Jim Henderson:

...

On Sat, 18 Jul 2015 01:00:17 +0200, Jay wrote:

...

...

That it might. The trick with "up-to-date" (or whatever synonym is used) is that it needs to be clear that while it's got current software, it's not necessarily "bleeding-edge" current software.

True. The right wording is important. But there would be accompanying info. And I think those seeking bleeding-edge-experience don't belong to the target group. So disappointing one ore two of them wouldn't be so bad.

Agreed. But it helps us to make sure the wording limits the field of disappointed users to a handful rather than a segment who thought that "up-to-date" meant "bleeding edge". I'm guessing you won't disagree with that. :)

No. I mean: yes - I won't disagree. ;)

Rainer Fiebig

After reading the thread I have been tempted to forge a word: Commuterprise= Community + Enterprise.

That written, I only thought of openSUSE Leap 42.1: The Commuterprise Release to give tools for adventurous spirits and healing the business needs.

I don't know; living in the Seattle area (but being fortunate enough to work from home), that neologism makes me think about being stuck in rush- hour traffic. It sounds like a reward for not getting too angry the other drivers (the "Commuter Prize"). At least, that was my first reaction to it. Jim -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am Montag, 20. Juli 2015, 10:17:33 schrieb Douglas DeMaio:

On 07/18/2015 05:14 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:

...

On Sat, 18 Jul 2015 01:00:17 +0200, Jay wrote:

...

...

That it might. The trick with "up-to-date" (or whatever synonym is used) is that it needs to be clear that while it's got current software, it's not necessarily "bleeding-edge" current software.

True. The right wording is important. But there would be accompanying info. And I think those seeking bleeding-edge-experience don't belong to the target group. So disappointing one ore two of them wouldn't be so bad.

Agreed. But it helps us to make sure the wording limits the field of disappointed users to a handful rather than a segment who thought that "up-to-date" meant "bleeding edge". I'm guessing you won't disagree with that. :)

...

...

So while it was incredibly stable, it was too inflexible for my needs.

I guess you'll be one of the first to leap to Leap! ;)

It depends on whether my testing shows that the directory server I run on it will run (it's eDirectory - my background, and while the products I work on in my day job doesn't "officially" support it, it's an LDAP server, and the products I work with do support generic LDAP). I don't care if Micro Focus officially supports the config, but if it won't run, I won't be able to use it (that Leap is based on SLE gives it a better chance of running, though, I think) - so it is entirely possible.

But that's also a different discussion. :)

Jim

I would say most of why you all have been describing about Leap is its synergy. I would suggest something like "Leap - Synergies of Community & Enterprise". Community implies up-to-date and Enterprise conveys stable.

In that case Debian would be 100% "up-to-date" and 0% stable. Hm... Rainer Fiebig -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org