On 05/17/2017 09:30 AM, Martin Pluskal wrote:

On 17.05.17 15:18, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

...have we at any time in the past ever had a situation where there was only ONE version of openSUSE officially supported?

I mean, Leap 42.3 is not out yet... Leap 42.2 + Tumbleweed = two

Also I am not sure what is actually your point - what would be wrong with having just one openSUSE supported?

Regards

Martin

Actually ... I, too, would prefer to see the dying version overlap the upcoming version for a period of time, though not really for the same reason (ie: not just to have 2 Leap versions). But, that is my personal preference. -- -Gerry Makaro aka Fraser_Bell on the forums, IRC, and mail at openSUSE.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Carlos E. R. composed on 2017-05-17 18:43 (UTC-0400):

Well, we had 42.2 and 42.3 overlap :-) 42.3 past tense??? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Carlos E. R. composed on 2017-05-18 00:43 (UTC+0200):

Well, we had 42.2 and 42.3 overlap :-) 42.3 past tense??? -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 2017-05-18 01:31, Simon Lees wrote:

On 05/18/2017 08:57 AM, Felix Miata wrote:

...

Carlos E. R. composed on 2017-05-18 00:43 (UTC+0200):

...

Well, we had 42.2 and 42.3 overlap :-) 42.3 past tense???

I presume he meant 42.1 and 42.2 which has had 6 months of overlap, as will 42.2 and 42.3 unless the support schedule is changed.

Yes, exactly :-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" (Minas Tirith))

On Wed, 17 May 2017 21:56:45 +0200, Mathias Homann wrote:

Am Mittwoch, 17. Mai 2017, 18:30:54 CEST schrieb Martin Pluskal:

...

On 17.05.17 15:18, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

...have we at any time in the past ever had a situation where there was only ONE version of openSUSE officially supported?

I mean, Leap 42.3 is not out yet...

Leap 42.2 + Tumbleweed = two

Tumbleweed is officially supported? I was under the impression that tumbleweed is the developer version, i.e. "enter at your own risk"...

From https://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Tumbleweed :

"The Tumbleweed distribution is a pure rolling release version of openSUSE containing the latest stable versions of all software instead of relying on rigid periodic release cycles. The project does this for users that want the newest stable software. Tumbleweed is based on Factory, openSUSE's main development codebase. Tumbleweed is updated once Factory's bleeding edge software has been integrated, stabilized and tested. Tumbleweed contains the latest stable applications and is ready and reliable for daily use." So no, based on Factory, but not a "developer version" or "enter at your own risk". Has been this way for a while. 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

Carlos E. R. wrote:

On 2017-05-17 21:56, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

Am Mittwoch, 17. Mai 2017, 18:30:54 CEST schrieb Martin Pluskal:

...

On 17.05.17 15:18, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

...have we at any time in the past ever had a situation where there was only ONE version of openSUSE officially supported?

I mean, Leap 42.3 is not out yet...

Leap 42.2 + Tumbleweed = two

Tumbleweed is officially supported? I was under the impression that tumbleweed is the developer version, i.e. "enter at your own risk"...

Well, it is the developer version, but stabilised, after passing an automated test bench, and officially supported :-)

We just need a clear/accurate definition of what "supported" really means in this context. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (21.5°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 18 May 2017 at 19:53, Per Jessen wrote:

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On 2017-05-17 21:56, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

Am Mittwoch, 17. Mai 2017, 18:30:54 CEST schrieb Martin Pluskal:

...

On 17.05.17 15:18, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

...have we at any time in the past ever had a situation where there was only ONE version of openSUSE officially supported?

I mean, Leap 42.3 is not out yet...

Leap 42.2 + Tumbleweed = two

Tumbleweed is officially supported? I was under the impression that tumbleweed is the developer version, i.e. "enter at your own risk"...

Well, it is the developer version, but stabilised, after passing an automated test bench, and officially supported :-)

We just need a clear/accurate definition of what "supported" really means in this context.

In my opinion for our distributions 'supported' falls under the following definition Built to the following standards and not shipping anything to users until they're complete: - formal legal review, ensuring the licenses involved are compatible with each other and openSUSE's license as a GPL collective work. - formal packaging review, ensuring the packages are built sensibly and maintainably - formal security review for security sensitive packages - formal QA, ensuring the packages will work (to clarify 'formal' in this context means an established process consistently applied to all applicable changes) and after release, to be supported a distribution must ALSO be: - updated using packages that comply to the same standards as the original release, either using matching processes or a refined process for post-release maintenance By this definition, both openSUSE Tumbleweed and Leap 42.2 are supported, and everything else is unsupported. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On vendredi, 19 mai 2017 10.44:49 h CEST Richard Brown wrote:

On 19 May 2017 at 10:33, Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 18 May 2017 at 19:53, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On 2017-05-17 21:56, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

Am Mittwoch, 17. Mai 2017, 18:30:54 CEST schrieb Martin Pluskal:

...

On 17.05.17 15:18, Mathias Homann wrote: > ...have we at any time in the past ever had a situation where there > was only ONE version of openSUSE officially supported? > > I mean, Leap 42.3 is not out yet...

Leap 42.2 + Tumbleweed = two

Tumbleweed is officially supported? I was under the impression that tumbleweed is the developer version, i.e. "enter at your own risk"...

Well, it is the developer version, but stabilised, after passing an automated test bench, and officially supported :-)

We just need a clear/accurate definition of what "supported" really means in this context.

In my opinion for our distributions 'supported' falls under the following definition

Built to the following standards and not shipping anything to users

until they're complete: - formal legal review, ensuring the licenses involved are compatible

with each other and openSUSE's license as a GPL collective work.

- formal packaging review, ensuring the packages are built sensibly

and maintainably

- formal security review for security sensitive packages - formal QA, ensuring the packages will work

(to clarify 'formal' in this context means an established process consistently applied to all applicable changes)

and after release, to be supported a distribution must ALSO be: - updated using packages that comply to the same standards as the

original release, either using matching processes or a refined process for post-release maintenance

oh and I forgot to add

- monitoring CVE's & upstreams to proactively update packages, especially those with security implications.

...

By this definition, both openSUSE Tumbleweed and Leap 42.2 are supported, and everything else is unsupported.

What about pre-testing 42.3 :-) I mean it is a valuable and supported work that has to be done. -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch Bareos Partner, openSUSE Member, fsfe fellowship GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 19 May 2017 at 16:26, Bruno Friedmann wrote:

On vendredi, 19 mai 2017 10.44:49 h CEST Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 19 May 2017 at 10:33, Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 18 May 2017 at 19:53, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Carlos E. R. wrote:

...

On 2017-05-17 21:56, Mathias Homann wrote:

...

Am Mittwoch, 17. Mai 2017, 18:30:54 CEST schrieb Martin Pluskal: > On 17.05.17 15:18, Mathias Homann wrote: >> ...have we at any time in the past ever had a situation where there >> was only ONE version of openSUSE officially supported? >> >> I mean, Leap 42.3 is not out yet... > > Leap 42.2 + Tumbleweed = two

Tumbleweed is officially supported? I was under the impression that tumbleweed is the developer version, i.e. "enter at your own risk"...

Well, it is the developer version, but stabilised, after passing an automated test bench, and officially supported :-)

We just need a clear/accurate definition of what "supported" really means in this context.

In my opinion for our distributions 'supported' falls under the following definition

Built to the following standards and not shipping anything to users

until they're complete: - formal legal review, ensuring the licenses involved are compatible

with each other and openSUSE's license as a GPL collective work.

- formal packaging review, ensuring the packages are built sensibly

and maintainably

- formal security review for security sensitive packages - formal QA, ensuring the packages will work

(to clarify 'formal' in this context means an established process consistently applied to all applicable changes)

and after release, to be supported a distribution must ALSO be: - updated using packages that comply to the same standards as the

original release, either using matching processes or a refined process for post-release maintenance

oh and I forgot to add

- monitoring CVE's & upstreams to proactively update packages, especially those with security implications.

...

By this definition, both openSUSE Tumbleweed and Leap 42.2 are supported, and everything else is unsupported.

What about pre-testing 42.3 :-) I mean it is a valuable and supported work that has to be done.

I think 'supported' should be taken as a statement that a user can take it, put it into use, and rely on it until the end of life of the version in question. 42.3 isn't released yet, so, no, not yet :) But it will be supported when it releases in July, and it will be awesome, true :) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 19 May 2017 at 18:50, Mathias Homann wrote:

Am 19.05.2017 um 17:09 schrieb Richard Brown:

...

I think 'supported' should be taken as a statement that a user can take it, put it into use, and rely on it until the end of life of the version in question.

... seeing the traffic on the opensuse factory list = tumbleweed should be considered unsupported. I would not give that to a "mere user".

Tens of thousands of people would seem to disagree with you - https://speakerdeck.com/sysrich/fosdem-2017-how-i-learned-to-stop-worrying-a... -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Richard Brown wrote:

On 18 May 2017 at 19:53, Per Jessen wrote:

...

We just need a clear/accurate definition of what "supported" really means in this context.

In my opinion for our distributions 'supported' falls under the following definition

Built to the following standards and not shipping anything to users until they're complete: - formal legal review, ensuring the licenses involved are compatible with each other and openSUSE's license as a GPL collective work. - formal packaging review, ensuring the packages are built sensibly and maintainably - formal security review for security sensitive packages - formal QA, ensuring the packages will work

(to clarify 'formal' in this context means an established process consistently applied to all applicable changes)

and after release, to be supported a distribution must ALSO be: - updated using packages that comply to the same standards as the original release, either using matching processes or a refined process for post-release maintenance

By this definition, both openSUSE Tumbleweed and Leap 42.2 are supported, and everything else is unsupported.

I agree. I am just wondering if we should choose a different word. "to support" to many people means "to help" or "to assist", which is often interpreted to mean a lot more than your four lines above. I don't have a better suggestion, but sometimes we are more keen on rejecting requests for support by saying "no longer supported" than we are on saying "yes, we'll help you with that, it's supported". The word is losing its significance, I fear. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (10.1°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 05/19/2017 09:25 PM, Per Jessen wrote:

Richard Brown wrote:

...

On 18 May 2017 at 19:53, Per Jessen wrote:

...

We just need a clear/accurate definition of what "supported" really means in this context.

In my opinion for our distributions 'supported' falls under the following definition

Built to the following standards and not shipping anything to users until they're complete: - formal legal review, ensuring the licenses involved are compatible with each other and openSUSE's license as a GPL collective work. - formal packaging review, ensuring the packages are built sensibly and maintainably - formal security review for security sensitive packages - formal QA, ensuring the packages will work

(to clarify 'formal' in this context means an established process consistently applied to all applicable changes)

and after release, to be supported a distribution must ALSO be: - updated using packages that comply to the same standards as the original release, either using matching processes or a refined process for post-release maintenance

By this definition, both openSUSE Tumbleweed and Leap 42.2 are supported, and everything else is unsupported.

I agree. I am just wondering if we should choose a different word. "to support" to many people means "to help" or "to assist", which is often interpreted to mean a lot more than your four lines above. I don't have a better suggestion, but sometimes we are more keen on rejecting requests for support by saying "no longer supported" than we are on saying "yes, we'll help you with that, it's supported". The word is losing its significance, I fear.

I have heard the theory that Ubuntu helped to break the real meaning of "support" when they started labeling some of their releases as LTS (Long Time Support). Before that, "support" meant real assistance and was almost always associated to a contract. "If you have problems, call me. I will fix them." That's what companies and individuals pay for. What free Linux distributions offer is not support, it's maintenance. "I will make sure the included packages are safe and not broken by other updates". Many companies have a model based on offering support on top of an already maintained open source software. As I said, some people think that if Ubuntu would have called their releases LTM (Long Time Maintenance), it would have been more accurate and others wouldn't have feel "forced" to start misusing the word, just to pair with them. Cheers. -- Ancor González Sosa YaST Team at SUSE Linux GmbH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Ancor Gonzalez Sosa wrote:

On 05/19/2017 09:25 PM, Per Jessen wrote:

...

I agree. I am just wondering if we should choose a different word. "to support" to many people means "to help" or "to assist", which is often interpreted to mean a lot more than your four lines above. I don't have a better suggestion, but sometimes we are more keen on rejecting requests for support by saying "no longer supported" than we are on saying "yes, we'll help you with that, it's supported". The word is losing its significance, I fear.

I have heard the theory that Ubuntu helped to break the real meaning of "support" when they started labeling some of their releases as LTS (Long Time Support).

Before that, "support" meant real assistance and was almost always associated to a contract. "If you have problems, call me. I will fix them." That's what companies and individuals pay for.

What free Linux distributions offer is not support, it's maintenance.

I like that word. Somehow "out of maintenance" sounds much better than "no longer supported". -- Per Jessen, Zürich (18.8°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 18 May 2017 at 07:33, Michal Kubecek wrote:

On Wednesday, 17 May 2017 15:18 Mathias Homann wrote:

...

...have we at any time in the past ever had a situation where there was only ONE version of openSUSE officially supported?

I mean, Leap 42.3 is not out yet...

Current situation is quite different from what we had earlier. In the old model, each new version was really new, forked fresh from Factory, so that there was in actually no real "major" and "minor" version. As new versions came each 6 or 8 months (more or less), noone could blame users who did not want to do a full upgrade to new codebase so often. That's why there was an overlap between [n] and [n+2], so that you could skip e.g. 12.2 and upgrade directly from 12.1 to 12.3 without losing support at any moment.

With Leap 42.x, core packages (mostly) follow SLE ones where the policy is that upgrading in a new service pack should be well reasoned, not just "hey, there is a new upstream version". And this logic should apply to most of the distribution - or at least that is the plan. There are exceptions, of course, as some packages do not fit into this model well and some maintainers do not agree with this policy, but in general, Leap 42.x and 42.(x+1) should be much closer to each other than e.g. 12.1 and 12.2. Therefore users should fear upgrading to next point release less and it should make much less sense to skip 42.2 and upgrade 42.1 systems directly to 42.3.

What is a different story, though, is moving to new major version with completely new codebase. IMHO we should think very carefully about the overlap of lifetimes of last 42.x and 43.0/15.0/whatever it is called. IMHO it would make good sense to have longer overlap (12 months?) between those.

Release Dates of SLE/Leap 15 are not yet final, so this is an educated estimate based on the information I have available to me, but we're currently looking at a situation where there should be a minimum of 9 months between the release of Leap 15 and the end of life of 42.3. There is a possibility that the overlap could be extended beyond that. We'll see. I'm involved in conversations on the topic but I wouldn't expect any news in this area quickly, as there are lots of moving parts involved. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org