Fredag den 5. november 2010 14:43:50 skrev Jos Poortvliet:

At the conf one piece of feedback was that we need a single-sentence mission to describe what we want - very much like what fedora has:

Ah, smart people at the conference :-)

The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.

I think I like their mission and it's also pretty correct

Well, their mission is quite sympathetic and I'm glad to have Fedora around, but if you read between the lines it really means: "unproductive, bleeding edge, experimental toy for geeks". And I'm pretty sure that most of the openSUSE community wants something rather different - fortunately most of the strategy discussion so far has confirmed this.

• so we

brainstormed on what would fit openSUSE. Suggestions are very welcome, we currently have:

The openSUSE project's mission is to unlock the posibilities of computers to users around the globe using the power and flexibility of Linux.

but it's far from perfect. Somehow it should mention we focus on flexibility and power ("make things as simple as possible but no simpler"), it should be ambitious (eg worldwide blabla), focussed on end-users etc - the requirements are clear as they come from the rest of the strategy discusion. But now, how to phrase it in one sentence?

Sorry to keep repeating myself, but the keywords here should definitely be productive, powerful and professional :-)

How about something along these lines: "In the openSUSE project we work together to create a professional and powerful Linux distribution, which lets people be productive."

On Friday 05 November 2010 16:46:35 Martin Schlander wrote:

How about something along these lines: "In the openSUSE project we work together to create a professional and powerful Linux distribution, which lets people be productive."

Too narrow since it excludes the infrastructure around the distribution we have, especially the openSUSE Build Service.

Otherwise I would like it ;). Please give it another try :-)

Andreas

Andreas Jaeger wrote:

On Friday 05 November 2010 16:46:35 Martin Schlander wrote:

...

How about something along these lines: "In the openSUSE project we work together to create a professional and powerful Linux distribution, which lets people be productive."

Too narrow since it excludes the infrastructure around the distribution we have, especially the openSUSE Build Service.

Are we perhaps talking about two different "items" - the infrastructure and the distro? Most people will generally only meet the latter.

Fredag den 5. november 2010 22:07:38 skrev Steven L Hess:

On 11/05/2010 08:46 AM, Martin Schlander wrote:

...

How about something along these lines: "In the openSUSE project we work together to create a professional and powerful Linux distribution, which lets people be productive."

Substitute something else for professional. I am sure there are plenty of users like me who don't care if "professionals" find openSUSE useful. I don't do one thing "professional" with my 11.3 installations, I do things that are useful to me. Let SLED be what professionals use.

I'm not an IT professional either. But I still like my distro to have a "professional feel", which I think openSUSE has and is one of the things that sets it apart from some other distros and which should be preserved going forward.

But you might be right that the word is counter-productive here - because it smells a little bit of commercialism and elitism I guess.

Steven L Hess wrote:

Substitute something else for professional. I am sure there are plenty of users like me who don't care if "professionals" find openSUSE useful. I don't do one thing "professional" with my 11.3 installations, I do things that are useful to me. Let SLED be what professionals use.

I'm also not sure professional is the best choice of words here, but the E in SLED is for Enterprise, which is different. There are many small-to-medium size businesses that (could) manage very well with a professional openSUSE distro.

On Sunday 07 November 2010 06:00:37 Carlos E. R. wrote:

On Sunday, 2010-11-07 at 11:23 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Steven L Hess wrote:

...

Substitute something else for professional. I am sure there are plenty of users like me who don't care if "professionals" find openSUSE useful. I don't do one thing "professional" with my 11.3 installations, I do things that are useful to me. Let SLED be what professionals use.

I'm also not sure professional is the best choice of words here, but the E in SLED is for Enterprise, which is different. There are many small-to-medium size businesses that (could) manage very well with a professional openSUSE distro.

Absolutely.

Although, the drop of maintenance time to only 18 months has sent quite a few looking for something else that offers at least 24 months.

Professional is fine word waking up memories of something that was good in every piece it was installed.

And just remark on "short" maintenance term of 18 months. For people that offer services based on openSUSE to SOHO market, it should be no problem if they support only desktops. Having end users to learn few bits ever 1.5 years should not be a problem, it can be seen as your active role to keep customer up to the modern times demands.

With servers is another story, but if you support services that need stability then use SLES, otherwise pull sleeves up and learn how to adapt configuration to new release, or find other in the same position and take over maintenance beyond 1.5 years.

KDE3 guys showed by example that if you really want, then nothing is impossible.

On Sunday 07 November 2010 12:28:35 Per Jessen wrote:

Somehow I suspect you don't deal with a lot of business or back-office end-users, Rajko.

No as IT persons do. I'm assembler in my company and I don't touch even things that is easy to rectify, just because I'm not trained to do so :)

I see people that hate the job and any piece of work place, including computers. They don't want to learn more than one path how to accomplish tasks they are paid for. They can't say to the boss the truth, but go around and complain on anything possible.

In such circumstances even cosmetic change will create (artificial) need for retraining, which is what bosses hate. Not that workers will actually do anything with 15 minutes that they have to spend on training, but it is documented loss, that otherwise will pass unnoticed. Also, they have to add all lost time to correct errors that passionate work place haters and people that are at their skill limits, will do.

However, I also don't think the 18 months interval is a problem, it only means that people skip one or two releases, in particular when they (the releases) don't bring any significant/desired new functionality.

...

With servers is another story, but if you support services that need stability then use SLES, otherwise pull sleeves up and learn how to adapt configuration to new release, or find other in the same position and take over maintenance beyond 1.5 years.

Yep. That works fine too.

Sure, but that was steady complain by few guys on opensuse ML. I can understand their pain when they have to contact their customers and offer solutions, but my opinion on that is above.

Le 07/11/2010 18:09, Rajko M. a écrit :

With servers is another story, but if you support services that need stability then use SLES, otherwise pull sleeves up and learn how to adapt configuration to new release, or find other in the same position and take over maintenance beyond 1.5 years.

well. I could be possible to simply *document* how to maintain the few basic applications exposed to the web - most of them not being maintained anyway by openSUSE (php scripts).

If someboy is interested, we can open an other thread on this: how to self - maintain a server.

But not here. You can also send me a mail privately if you think it necessary, I could then open an other trhread

jdd

On 2010-11-05 Martin wrote:

Fredag den 5. november 2010 14:43:50 skrev Jos Poortvliet:

...

At the conf one piece of feedback was that we need a single-sentence

...

mission to describe what we want - very much like what fedora has:

Ah, smart people at the conference :-)

...

The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.

I think I like their mission and it's also pretty correct

Well, their mission is quite sympathetic and I'm glad to have Fedora around, but if you read between the lines it really means: "unproductive, bleeding edge, experimental toy for geeks". And I'm pretty sure that most of the openSUSE community wants something rather different - fortunately most of the strategy discussion so far has confirmed this.

Sure. I'm not saying I like their mission so much it should be ours - we have a different goal. What I like about their mission is that it is: - ambitious - has a GLOBAL goal - gives direction and identity - yet is broad enough not to exclude much

So for them, it is a good mission. We'd need a mission which has the same properties yet breathes a different (but no smaller) ambition...

...

• so we

brainstormed on what would fit openSUSE. Suggestions are very welcome, we currently have:

The openSUSE project's mission is to unlock the posibilities of computers to users around the globe using the power and flexibility of Linux.

but it's far from perfect. Somehow it should mention we focus on flexibility and power ("make things as simple as possible but no simpler"), it should be ambitious (eg worldwide blabla), focussed on end-users etc - the requirements are clear as they come from the rest of the strategy discusion. But now, how to phrase it in one sentence?

Sorry to keep repeating myself, but the keywords here should definitely be productive, powerful and professional :-)

How about something along these lines: "In the openSUSE project we work together to create a professional and powerful Linux distribution, which lets people be productive."

Yes, that's what we do. Now why do we do it? We do want something right? So what is that? What do we want to change in the world by releasing openSUSE?

If nothing, we'd better stop doing it... ;-)

(yes, we do want to bring something - something which is more open, more flexible, more powerful, more professional, more productive. But how to say that in one sentence?)

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 12:55:35 +0100, Martin Schlander wrote:

"The openSUSE community works together to create useful and powerful technologies, with the aim of enabling productive usage of Linux and free/open source software."

I like this; the detail afterwards would (as I've mentioned in earlier replies) need to include answers to the "for whom" question and define "useful and powerful" in a meaningful way.

Jim

On 2010-11-05 Per wrote:

Jos Poortvliet wrote:

...

On 2010-11-05 Per wrote:

...

I guess Joos

one jos, two joos? ;-)

Who(o)ps, sorry about that, I was typoing from memory. Feel free to omit an s from my last name :-)

Per Jesen? Wel, ok :D

But no problem, just thought it was funny :D

...

At the conf one piece of feedback was that we need a single-sentence mission to describe what we want - very much like what fedora has:

The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.

I think I like their mission and it's also pretty correct - so we brainstormed on what would fit openSUSE. Suggestions are very welcome, we currently have:

The openSUSE project's mission is to unlock the posibilities of computers to users around the globe using the power and flexibility of Linux.

Hmm, I can't help thinking this is the kind of mostly pointless corporate mission statement I've have presented with innumerable times in my corporate past.

Hmmm. to check: do you think the same about the one Fedora has?

...

but it's far from perfect. Somehow it should mention we focus on flexibility and power ("make things as simple as possible but no simpler"), it should be ambitious (eg worldwide blabla), focussed on end-users etc - the requirements are clear as they come from the rest of the strategy discusion. But now, how to phrase it in one sentence?

Have a lot of fun?

yeah but is that why openSUSE exists? Just to have fun? If it is, fine, of course. I thought we had a slightly higher goal, like Bringing Something Better Into This World.

Not everyone will have the exact same goal which will obviously ensure our mission WILL be a bit wide, vague (and probably, because of that, corporate?). But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to define it, right?

Jos Poortvliet wrote:

...

...

The openSUSE project's mission is to unlock the posibilities of computers to users around the globe using the power and flexibility of Linux.

Hmm, I can't help thinking this is the kind of mostly pointless corporate mission statement I've have presented with innumerable times in my corporate past.

Hmmm. to check: do you think the same about the one Fedora has?

If this is the one: "The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.", then yes, I think that is also mostly pointless waffle. It sounds grand, but does it _mean_ anything?

...

...

but it's far from perfect. Somehow it should mention we focus on flexibility and power ("make things as simple as possible but no simpler"), it should be ambitious (eg worldwide blabla), focussed on end-users etc - the requirements are clear as they come from the rest of the strategy discusion. But now, how to phrase it in one sentence?

Have a lot of fun?

yeah but is that why openSUSE exists? Just to have fun? If it is, fine, of course. I thought we had a slightly higher goal, like Bringing Something Better Into This World.

I hope the projects aim will be to produce a high-quality, dependable Linux distribution, and that we'll have a lot of fun doing it.

Not everyone will have the exact same goal which will obviously ensure our mission WILL be a bit wide, vague (and probably, because of that, corporate?). But that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to define it, right?

First, I think the important thing for a mission statement for a volunteer community is to actually _say_ something. Second, the mission statement isn't meant to express everyones individual goals, it's meant to express just _one_ goal.

On Tuesday 09 November 2010 13:19:25 Per Jessen wrote:

Jos Poortvliet wrote:

...

...

...

The openSUSE project's mission is to unlock the posibilities of computers to users around the globe using the power and flexibility of Linux.

Hmm, I can't help thinking this is the kind of mostly pointless corporate mission statement I've have presented with innumerable times in my corporate past.

Hmmm. to check: do you think the same about the one Fedora has?

If this is the one: "The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.", then yes, I think that is also mostly pointless waffle. It sounds grand, but does it _mean_ anything?

Acutally I read it as 'we advance technology' (which results in them shipping bleeding edge stuff, even if it might break things). But on a second look, it doesn't even say that. Maybe I was too enthousiastic about their mission :D

Hey,

On 11/8/10 12:44 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

Regarding mission, I just stumbled upon this:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE creates one of the world's best Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Which is a shortened version of the "We are" paragraph from the guiding principles. The guiding principles already contain all the mission statements we need i think. I fail to see why we need something else.

Henne

Le 08/11/2010 12:47, Henne Vogelsang a écrit :

statements we need i think. I fail to see why we need something else.

+1

jdd

On Mon, 2010-11-08 at 13:14 +0100, Martin Schlander wrote:

Mandag den 8. november 2010 12:47:44 skrev Henne Vogelsang:

...

On 11/8/10 12:44 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

...

Regarding mission, I just stumbled upon this:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE creates one of the world's best Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Which is a shortened version of the "We are" paragraph from the guiding principles. The guiding principles already contain all the mission statements we need i think. I fail to see why we need something else.

These things say nothing other than that we're a community making a Linux distribution. No useful information for anyone.

We really, really, really, really, really need something short and precise which tells users and contributors (potential and existing) alike, *exactly* what we're trying to do and what makes openSUSE different than the gazillion other distros out there.

We're never going to achieve "exactly" statement. Tht's what got us in trouble in the first place when we got too narrow with our definitions. openSUSE as a project is very broad and flexible and offers many benefits. We can try to specifiy what it is we do so well, but to say it "exactly" will be chasing a pipe dream. We're just too damn good at too many things. :-)

Bryen

Mandag den 8. november 2010 13:19:54 skrev Karsten König:

Am Montag, 8. November 2010, 13:14:15 schrieb Martin Schlander:

...

Mandag den 8. november 2010 12:47:44 skrev Henne Vogelsang:

...

On 11/8/10 12:44 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

...

Regarding mission, I just stumbled upon this:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE creates one of the world's best Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Which is a shortened version of the "We are" paragraph from the guiding principles. The guiding principles already contain all the mission statements we need i think. I fail to see why we need something else.

These things say nothing other than that we're a community making a Linux distribution. No useful information for anyone.

We really, really, really, really, really need something short and precise which tells users and contributors (potential and existing) alike, *exactly* what we're trying to do and what makes openSUSE different than the gazillion other distros out there.

Short and exact is often conflicting, this isn't math you know? =)

Well.. if you guys get your way openSUSE will continue to be an anarchistic mess without any direction or identity.. or success.

Am Montag, 8. November 2010, 13:21:49 schrieb Martin Schlander:

Mandag den 8. november 2010 13:19:54 skrev Karsten König:

...

Am Montag, 8. November 2010, 13:14:15 schrieb Martin Schlander:

...

Mandag den 8. november 2010 12:47:44 skrev Henne Vogelsang:

...

On 11/8/10 12:44 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

...

Regarding mission, I just stumbled upon this:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE creates one of the world's best Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Which is a shortened version of the "We are" paragraph from the guiding principles. The guiding principles already contain all the mission statements we need i think. I fail to see why we need something else.

These things say nothing other than that we're a community making a Linux distribution. No useful information for anyone.

We really, really, really, really, really need something short and precise which tells users and contributors (potential and existing) alike, *exactly* what we're trying to do and what makes openSUSE different than the gazillion other distros out there.

Short and exact is often conflicting, this isn't math you know? =)

Well.. if you guys get your way openSUSE will continue to be an anarchistic mess without any direction or identity.. or success.

Fair enough, how about getting the strategy document done and 'signed' first and afterwards start some kind of competition for a good 3 lines summary/catchphrase and the winner gets some 'Thank you' gift, like one of the plush geekos =)

Cheers, Karsten

On Tuesday 09 November 2010 12:07:03 Martin Schlander wrote:

Tirsdag den 9. november 2010 11:20:50 skrev Karsten König:

...

how about getting the strategy document done and 'signed' first and afterwards start some kind of competition for a good 3 lines summary/catchphrase

I thought we were already at that point :-)

Well, yes, most of the strategy is pretty much fixed as there weren't many comments on the last draft. It still needs finishing up (sorry for not doing that...) and we can publish it. I felt we might need this 1-sentence thing first, but maybe it's true that we can just move on without that for now.

Still I'll give a short-summary a shot based on the many comments in this thread... Thanks all for sharing your thoughts!

Mandag den 8. november 2010 13:25:34 skrev Henne Vogelsang:

On 11/8/10 1:14 PM, Martin Schlander wrote:

...

We really, really, really, really, really need something short and precise which tells users and contributors (potential and existing) alike, *exactly* what we're trying to do and what makes openSUSE different than the gazillion other distros out there.

I agree but this is something completely different and we were already on track with that. What happened? Why we are engaging in mission statements for the project now? Looks like ADD to me...

The mission statement is nothing more than a short summary of the strategy in one or two sentences imo.

When people ask "why openSUSE?" you can't just point them to a 2-3 page document.

On 11/08/2010 08:10 AM, jdd wrote:

Le 08/11/2010 13:32, Martin Schlander a écrit :

...

When people ask "why openSUSE?" you can't just point them to a 2-3 page document.

openSUSE is a good choice that is easy to install, easy to use, high quality, and professional.

On Thursday 09 December 2010 01:21:18 Jos Poortvliet wrote:

On Monday 08 November 2010 12:47:44 Henne Vogelsang wrote:

...

Hey,

On 11/8/10 12:44 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

...

Regarding mission, I just stumbled upon this:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE creates one of the world's best Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Which is a shortened version of the "We are" paragraph from the guiding principles. The guiding principles already contain all the mission statements we need i think. I fail to see why we need something else.

Ok.

So building on that, taking a few comments from this thread:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE maintains and develops a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which it creates one of the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

• we're international
• we promote linux EVERYWHERE
• we build infrastructure
• we have created a very flexible and powerful linux distro (a powertool

that might be a bit heavy on Aunt Tilly, but she can ask Uncle Tom for help if there are issues)

• we work together in an open, transparant etc etc etc way

The change is actually very minor, I think most is covered with this and we don't deviate much from what we have. Should be quite acceptable. And for who wants to read more, we have the rest of the strategy which I'll be updating now.

Cheers, Jos

...

Henne

Ok. Here goes. Attached the almost-final draft. One painpoint left that I see: "openSUSE. Linux for grown-ups". I like it, but a comment from Helen South struck me:

Not keen on 'Linux for Grown-Ups'. Odd combination of arrogant and boring.

check out the competition http://www.insidesocal.com/click/2010/05/sloganeering-in-linuxunix---wh.ht ml

Alternatives are hard - "Open Productivity" is one thing I thought of. or more casually "Get Stuff Done." "Achieve More." "Customize Your Toolbox"

Maybe we should change this into something we're more comfortable with, it'll be visible so it will be picked up. So ideas on this are welcome.

Otherwise, I think we have something that has had a lot of input and thus should be something which is pretty good. Obviously we can do revisions in the future, however, I think it's ready for a vote by the openSUSE membership.

Agreed?

Jos

OpenSUSE Mission Statement (one paragraph summary) The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE develops and maintains a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which it creates one of the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

openSUSE - Linux for grown-ups

The following document is a statement describing the openSUSE users, community, products and goals. The document is for internal use and guides communication and decision making within the community. It does not aim to limit anyone within the community to work on what they want!

What is openSUSE

We are the openSUSE Community - friendly, welcoming, vibrant, and active. The openSUSE Project provides an open and innovative atmosphere to collaboratively work on a variety of distribution-related and packaging technologies and products.

Our development philosophy focuses on stability and flexibility, innovative community infrastructure, and seeking collaboration with the wider Free and Open Source community.

Below more details on our community, product and infrastructure.

Community and People The openSUSE community is the heart of the openSUSE project.

* We encourage and enable the users in our community to contribute to openSUSE and shape its future, lowering barriers to particpation in our community wherever possible. * The openSUSE community collaborates with other communities providing the best technology Free Software has to offer. * We care about contributing our improvements to upstream projects. * We work closely with companies in our ecosystem that provide additional value, including support and enterprise offerings on top of or derived from openSUSE technology. * Our community aims to foster the development of Free and Open Source Software while taking a pragmatic approach to what we ship to our users, allowing them to use proprietary alternatives if they choose to.

For details see http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Strategy_Community_Statement

Distribution The openSUSE distribution offers a powerful, stable core and enables everybody to contribute additional packages and tools through the openSUSE Build Service: freedom and choice are our keywords.

The openSUSE software distribution offers: * A powerful, stable core * Rich out of the box experience based on sane defaults with powerful tools for system configuration and customatization * Flexibilty and freedom of choice with a wide software selection. * Timed releases and an easy upgrade path between maintained versions of the official distribution * Seamless integration and compatibility with other operating systems and tools

The main focus of the openSUSE software distribution is on workstations, laptops, netbooks and servers.

Tools and services The freely available openSUSE tools and services aim to support the collaborative development process within openSUSE and we encourage other projects to leverage them for their own usage.

* We take advantage of our infrastructure to make up to date software available for multiple current releases for a variety of distributions including older releases of openSUSE * We provide technology to easily build openSUSE deriviates in the form of live images, appliances and even full distributions * We share our infrastructure technology such as openSUSE Build Service with others, providing them with tools to create whole distributions or single packages for a variety of platforms

Target users We cater for users who are interested in computers and want to experiment, learn or get work done. We offer them a stable and enjoyable computing experience which does not limit their freedom of choice, offering sane defaults and easy configuration.

What do we not focus on? The openSUSE community has its goals and targets; consequently there are things that are not in the direct focus of our community. This does of course not mean it is not possible to pursue any of those goals from within the openSUSE project or using the openSUSE tools - we are a Free and Open Source Software community and anything is possible.

openSUSE does not: * Oversimplify the system to the point where configuring it becomes harder. We prefer flexibility over an (extreme) focus on ease of use. * Always having the latest and greatest in the shipped releases. Through the Build Service you can install the latest packages or whole software groups built for your openSUSE version, preserving the stability and integrity of the rest of your installation. * We do not maintain large distribution-specific patches as we want to upstream as much of our work as possible. * Work on Mobile or embedded devices. * Offer enterprise-level support. We don't work on software or hardware certification, indemnification, OEM installations and the like. However we ensure our infrastructure enables our partners to offer these services.

On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 01:51:16 +0100 Jos Poortvliet jospoortvliet@gmail.com wrote:

openSUSE - Linux for grown-ups

Linux with "adult" content?

On Thursday 09 December 2010 17:00:06 Oddball wrote:

Op 09-12-10 09:33, pb@seat-1.com schreef:

...

On Thu, 9 Dec 2010 01:51:16 +0100

Jos Poortvliet jospoortvliet@gmail.com wrote:

...

openSUSE - Linux for grown-ups

Linux with "adult" content?

LOL...

hehehe

On Thursday 09 December 2010 14:23:03 Robert Schweikert wrote:

...

"openSUSE. Linux for grown-ups". I like it, but a comment from Helen South

struck me:

...

Not keen on 'Linux for Grown-Ups'. Odd combination of arrogant and boring.

openSUSE: Your Linux distribution

We do more than a distro :D

??

On Friday 10 December 2010 11:17:17 Per Jessen wrote:

Jos Poortvliet wrote:

...

On Thursday 09 December 2010 14:23:03 Robert Schweikert wrote:

...

...

"openSUSE. Linux for grown-ups". I like it, but a comment from Helen South

struck me:

...

Not keen on 'Linux for Grown-Ups'. Odd combination of arrogant and boring.

openSUSE: Your Linux distribution

We do more than a distro :D

Yes, but what should be our ultimate objective?

well that's what the proposal says:

"The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere."

On Friday 10 December 2010 14:48:38 Robert Schweikert wrote:

On 12/10/2010 04:41 AM, Jos Poortvliet wrote:

...

On Thursday 09 December 2010 14:23:03 Robert Schweikert wrote:

...

...

"openSUSE. Linux for grown-ups". I like it, but a comment from Helen South

struck me:

...

Not keen on 'Linux for Grown-Ups'. Odd combination of arrogant and boring.

openSUSE: Your Linux distribution

We do more than a distro :D

And how does "Linux for Grown-Ups" reflect that?

You have an alternative that DOES reflect that openSUSE is more of a pro distro compared to many others yet doesn't exclude people just because they like to play with it or use it productively or or or...

This one seems to only exclude kids who don't want to be grown-ups, not to bad compared to the "openSUSE: the professional solution" excluding most home users or "openSUSE: Your Linux Distribution" which says nothing...

BTW, my kids have openSUSE on their computers, maybe they shouldn't as they are definitely not grown up ;)

...

...

??

On Thursday 09 December 2010 02:08:17 Patrick Shanahan wrote:

• Jos Poortvliet jospoortvliet@gmail.com [12-08-10 19:22]:

...

• we have created a very flexible and powerful linux distro (a powertool

that might be a bit heavy on Aunt Tilly, but she can ask Uncle Tom for help if there are issues)

Some of the US populous may take exception to the use of "Uncle Tom". I would suggest another name. sugg.. Aunt Tilly and Uncle Jack.

Yeah, I just wrote the first name that came to mind... sorry...

Torsdag den 9. december 2010 16:39:10 skrev Martin Schlander:

Shortened, no nonsense version:

"The openSUSE community maintains and develops a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which we create a flexible and powerful Linux distribution - working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner."

I was too quick on the send button. This statement makes no mention of stability/productivity at all - which I think should be at the very core of the mission statement.

On Thursday, December 09, 2010 09:49:19 am Per Jessen wrote:

Maintaining and developing a packaging and distribution infrastructure is no doubt important, but does it really belong in the mission statement?

It should be. It is one of advantages that openSUSE has.

Build Service is a packaging system that can serve any software or distribution developer and it is our big plus. It gives weight to statements that call for cross distribution collaboration.

Apropos, if we look on Build Service we have long term commitment to cross distribution collaboration, which is way to go, instead of splitting efforts in smaller and smaller pieces as it is now.

Administrator wrote:

...

On Thursday, December 09, 2010 09:49:19 am Per Jessen wrote:

...

Maintaining and developing a packaging and distribution infrastructure is no doubt important, but does it really belong in the mission statement?

It should be. It is one of advantages that openSUSE has.

Build Service is a packaging system that can serve any software or distribution developer and it is our big plus. It gives weight to statements that call for cross distribution collaboration.

Apropos, if we look on Build Service we have long term commitment to cross distribution collaboration, which is way to go, instead of splitting efforts in smaller and smaller pieces as it is now.

Doesn't this imply that we now have 2 distinct products: a build service whose primarily market is the FOSS development community; and a distribution whose primary market is the Linux end users.

That is I was thinking too. Besides, if we were to list all our advantages in the mission statement, well ...

Jos Poortvliet wrote:

The statement should only be the text part, not the bullet points I wrote below it to explain...

so:

...

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE maintains and develops a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which it creates one of the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Seems rather complete, right?

I'd like to suggest shortening/sharpening it a bit:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort to create the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distribution, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Basil Chupin wrote:

On 10/12/2010 21:21, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Jos Poortvliet wrote:

...

The statement should only be the text part, not the bullet points I wrote below it to explain...

so:

...

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE maintains and develops a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which it creates one of the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Seems rather complete, right?

I'd like to suggest shortening/sharpening it a bit:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort to create the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distribution, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

This sounds like it is expressing the same sentiments as, "I'm from the government. I am here to help you."

Can't really be helped Basil, it was mostly designed by comittee.

On Fri, 10 Dec 2010 22:16:14 +1100 Basil Chupin blchupin@iinet.net.au and others wrote:

...

...

...

...

...

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use ...

As a potential user or community member, would I be attracted by such a statement?

No.

... by a claim like "openSUSE ist the most usable Linux distribution" ?

Yes.

It might be only a claim but at least it shows that they care and it creates some hope that the claim may be fullfilled. It's also makes a perfect internal decision guide line.

Fredag den 10. december 2010 13:27:54 skrev Jos Poortvliet:

Remember, a mission is internal. It's what we use to tell potential new contributors why we do what we do.

I have to disagree here in the strongest possible terms :-)

The mission is what we tell _all_ our stakeholders, when we want to explain what openSUSE is all about - that means end-users, contributors, sponsors, the wider FOSS-community in general, upstream, Attachmate suits, etc.

On Fri, 2010-12-10 at 13:27 +0100, Jos Poortvliet wrote:

But that claim is marketing, not our mission. Remember, a mission is internal. It's what we use to tell potential new contributors why we do what we do.

What's wrong with marketing? - It's needed in this day and age.

I have one for you:

openSUSE - Omnipotent Linux. -----------------------------

http://www.dictionary.net/omnipotent

omnipotent adj : having unlimited power [syn: almighty, all-powerful]

Source: WordNet (r) 2.0

//Bjørn

Fredag den 10. december 2010 10:43:52 skrev Jos Poortvliet:

The statement should only be the text part, not the bullet points I wrote below it to explain...

so:

...

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE maintains and develops a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which it creates one of the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Seems rather complete, right?

It seems a bit vague and off-point to me.

The first part about promoting Linux everywhere is unnecessary filler imho.

I don't like the emphasis on flexible - cuz I don't think we can deliver on it. Gentoo and Arch are flexible - openSUSE is considered by many Linux users to be particularly *in*flexible - at least compared to the "do-it-yourself" line of distros.

All it says about the distro itself - which is the only thing 99% of people will care about - is "flexible and powerful", so in the current form there's not much differentiating us from Fedora or Debian or others. I would suggest to add something about stability/productiveness and up-to-date-ness.

And I'd mention the distro before the tools and infrastructure. It makes it seem like the distro is secondary.

It's not made absolutely clear that openSUSE is a community distro, welcoming contributions from anyone. All it says is that whoever is creating openSUSE is working together in an open manner.

I also don't like the comparison to others. E.g. "one of the world's this and that". The mission statement should just say what _we_ want to do.

In other words it should look like this:

--------------------------- The openSUSE community invites everyone to join us in creating a powerful, up to date and productive Linux distribution plus distribution building infrastructure. We work together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community. ---------------------------

Rajko M. wrote:

On Friday, December 10, 2010 06:51:15 am Martin Schlander wrote:

...

The openSUSE community invites everyone to join us in creating a powerful, up to date and productive Linux distribution plus distribution building infrastructure. We work together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

I would only scramble a bit the sentence, leaving out "transparent" (I can't imagine open without transparent and vice versa),

Hmm, I can - there are plenty of "open source projects" out there, where e.g. the project organisation is completely non-transparent.

Rajko M. wrote:

On Sunday, December 12, 2010 06:26:58 am Per Jessen wrote:

...

Rajko M. wrote:

...

On Friday, December 10, 2010 06:51:15 am Martin Schlander wrote:

...

The openSUSE community invites everyone to join us in creating a powerful, up to date and productive Linux distribution plus distribution building infrastructure. We work together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

I would only scramble a bit the sentence, leaving out "transparent" (I can't imagine open without transparent and vice versa),

Hmm, I can - there are plenty of "open source projects" out there, where e.g. the project organisation is completely non-transparent.

"We work in a open way" is reference to whole organization activity and results of that activity.

Term "open source project" means that project's source code is publicly available to anyone willing to accept license terms and that license is accepted as open source license. It doesn't tell anything about openness of any other part of the project.

Exactly - do you think anyone really cares much about the fact that our "open" is not quite the same as in "open source"? "open" does not imply transparent, I think it's a good idea to include transparent.

On Sunday, December 12, 2010 11:45:46 am Per Jessen wrote: ...

...

"We work in a open way" is reference to whole organization activity and results of that activity.

Term "open source project" means that project's source code is publicly available to anyone willing to accept license terms and that license is accepted as open source license. It doesn't tell anything about openness of any other part of the project.

Exactly - do you think anyone really cares much about the fact that our "open" is not quite the same as in "open source"? "open" does not imply transparent, I think it's a good idea to include transparent.

We can split the hare until we get nausea, by taking one word out of context and slapping some other word to create perception of different meanings.

I used "open way" which as combination of words includes "transparent" and implies more, so adding word transparent in that context is plain redundancy.

On Monday 13 December 2010 08:03:35 Basil Chupin wrote:

On 13/12/2010 12:00, Rajko M. wrote:

...

On Sunday, December 12, 2010 11:45:46 am Per Jessen wrote: ...

...

...

"We work in a open way" is reference to whole organization activity and results of that activity.

Term "open source project" means that project's source code is publicly available to anyone willing to accept license terms and that license is accepted as open source license. It doesn't tell anything about openness of any other part of the project.

Exactly - do you think anyone really cares much about the fact that our "open" is not quite the same as in "open source"? "open" does not imply transparent, I think it's a good idea to include transparent.

We can split the hare until we get nausea,

For future reference, Rajko, the (English) expression is "splitting hairs" :-) . (I know that English is not your first language.)

...

by taking one word out of context

and slapping some other word to create perception of different meanings.

I used "open way" which as combination of words includes "transparent" and implies more, so adding word transparent in that context is plain redundancy.

But, you know, I cannot help wondering if this whole discussion is a "rear-guard" action to promote the declining fortunes of SuSE, now openSUSE, and to try and resurrect it to its "past glory" (how many posts does this thread consist of? I count 40 at the moment but this is after I started to pay attention to it since 9 December......).

Just a comment, not trying to start a flame war.

It's just I do not know of any other distro which is going thru the same agonising, hand-wringing , process. That's all.

Actually Fedora is discussing this too.

I also see something different here - first of all, people care, that is good. And second, I actually feel we are turning the boat around lately (yes butchering a dutch saying here). I think the article in Linux Journal* (despite the horrible title) makes this clear - people notice that there is a new spirit. Maybe that's mostly marketing, I don't know for sure. But there ARE things happening - from the very (VERY!) successful openSUSE conference to project Tumbleweed.

So yes, we have had a decline and in some ways we still aren't exactly growing. But to me, it feels we've had our worst time and are going somewhere now. OBS is being picked up, SUSE Studio attracts growing interest (while not an openSUSE project, it reflects positively on us) and we are getting more press attention.

*http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/has-novell-deal-hampered-opensuse

Pax to everyone :-) .

love and have fun, I'd say :D

BC

Jos

Martin Schlander wrote:

Mandag den 13. december 2010 08:03:35 skrev Basil Chupin:

...

It's just I do not know of any other distro which is going thru the same agonising, hand-wringing , process. That's all.

Cuz either they have top-down, centralized leadership/dictatorship. Or they have a clear identity from the beginning - which has been further established and cemented for years and years.

Both - because they have identity and leadership.

Whereas openSUSE is a schizofrenic with severe identity crisis,

And not much leadership ...

so there's no way around it. We should have done this years ago, and if we don't get it right this time, we'll prolly not get another chance in the foreseeable future.

+1.

On Monday 13 December 2010 02:00:22 Rajko M. wrote:

On Sunday, December 12, 2010 11:45:46 am Per Jessen wrote: ...

...

...

"We work in a open way" is reference to whole organization activity and results of that activity.

Term "open source project" means that project's source code is publicly available to anyone willing to accept license terms and that license is accepted as open source license. It doesn't tell anything about openness of any other part of the project.

Exactly - do you think anyone really cares much about the fact that our "open" is not quite the same as in "open source"? "open" does not imply transparent, I think it's a good idea to include transparent.

We can split the hare until we get nausea, by taking one word out of context and slapping some other word to create perception of different meanings.

I used "open way" which as combination of words includes "transparent" and implies more, so adding word transparent in that context is plain redundancy.

We can indeed keep splitting hairs (or split hares, also fun, google it hehe). I hope you feel my pain here - anytime I present something, somewhere between 3 and 5 ppl say 'nah, it should be like this'. When I take those comments into consideration and present something new - again 3-5 ppl come with something different... Rinse, repeat ad nauseam. Not that I don't like those statements - most of them are good suggestions. Ok, the bullet points I don't really agree with, it's hard to talk with bullet points ;-)

So say we take The openSUSE community invites everyone that wants to work in open and friendly way to join creation of a powerful, up to date, productive Linux distribution based on Free and Open Source Software.

This one is imho great. I do like flexible - you might say we're not as flexible as Gentoo or Arch, maybe not. But we are more flexible than most distro's - more well maintained desktops than anyone, choice between upstream or openSUSE packages, build service so you can put together your own mix of stable & up-to-date, YaST, zypper with the choices it offers... So I would put flexible in place of up-to-date (we're less up-to-date than most distro's with our 8 month release cycle).

Then the second part, about our technology. You wrote:

Our advantages are the Build Service, for simple creation of software packages or whole distributions, YaST and MirrorBrain, providing first class software management with top rated security and a strong web infrastructure covering all other aspects of software development and use.

I'm less happy with that. Needs re-wording and why do we mention YaST and MirrorBrain but not KIWI or Edu LiFE, Connect, openFATE or other projects? Let's just mention BS, it's our most distinctive and well-known technology.

Why not go for: We work together on collaborative infrastructure technologies like the Build Service and provide first class software management with top rated security and a strong web infrastructure covering all other aspects of software development and use.

We have however diverged a lot from what we initially had, and as Henne said - it wasn't that bad: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse- project/2010-11/msg00034.html

So let's do a little vote for whoever still cares:

Option one: based on our current project description:

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE maintains and develops a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which it creates one of the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Option two: completely different but also good :D

The openSUSE community invites everyone that wants to work in open and friendly way to join in the creation of a powerful, up to date, productive Linux distribution based on Free and Open Source Software.

We work together on collaborative infrastructure technologies like the Build Service and provide first class software management with top rated security and a strong web infrastructure covering all other aspects of software development and use.

I don't think there is enough energy (and reason) to delay this any further - we can change sections of the final result in the future. Things change anyway so in a year we might have to do some minor modifications anyway.

So whatever comes out of this little vote I will put in the final 'strategy' and present that to the openSUSE membership for voting. I know, the membership - not sure if that's the place where we must vote on this, but frankly I don't see a much better place which can't be derailed by 'outsiders'.

Cheers, Jos

Am Tue, 14 Dec 2010 13:16:10 +0100 schrieb Jos Poortvliet jospoortvliet@gmail.com :

(x) Option two

Tirsdag den 14. december 2010 13:16:10 skrev Jos Poortvliet:

So let's do a little vote for whoever still cares:

Option one: based on our current project description:

...

The openSUSE project is a worldwide effort that promotes the use of Linux everywhere. openSUSE maintains and develops a packaging and distribution infrastructure on which it creates one of the world's most flexible and powerful Linux distributions, working together in an open, transparent and friendly manner as part of the worldwide Free and Open Source Software community.

Option two: completely different but also good :D

...

The openSUSE community invites everyone that wants to work in open and friendly way to join in the creation of a powerful, up to date, productive Linux distribution based on Free and Open Source Software.

We work together on collaborative infrastructure technologies like the Build Service and provide first class software management with top rated security and a strong web infrastructure covering all other aspects of software development and use.

(x) Option two

On Monday, December 20, 2010 05:00:19 pm Jos Poortvliet wrote: ...

*watches monkey trow dice

Ok, after careful deliberation and much thought, the decision has been made to go for option one*. I will now finish up the 'strategy', present it to the board (hoping they won't disagree with everything in there) and let them present it to the openSUSE Membership.

Option one, is present for the last five plus years. It looks so washed out when one takes time to read other distros introduction on Distrowatch.

I'm not trying to see dice rolling again, at lest not right now, but if we want to look fresh and energized, we should give up on keeping exact the same old message for so long time. There is so many ways to say the same, that keeping one and the same message for five years doesn't give confidence that openSUSE has, among other things, imagination. On the other hand keeping old message gives feeling to the people that nothing is changing in openSUSE, which is currently so wrong.

Unlike software that should not be changed without need, messages to humans must be changed once in a while, or they get ignored. It is nothing new to any propagandist, but it might be to the people used to handle only software (2 votes to keep old message).

On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:44:33 +0100 Andreas Jaeger aj@novell.com wrote:

create and distribute the world's most usable Linux

Yes!

On Nov 08, 10 16:27:12 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

pb@seat-1.com wrote:

...

On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:44:33 +0100 Andreas Jaeger aj@novell.com wrote:

...

create and distribute the world's most usable Linux

Yes!

+1.

I like it! Quite ambitious!

cheers, JW-

Le 08/11/2010 17:11, Martin Schlander a écrit :

It was bad then, and it's even worse now, because "usable" is either just an empty phrase that can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean, or it means "Aunt Tillie distro" - which we have spent months establishing is a bad fit for openSUSE and doesn't reflect reality.

anyway anybody can read what he want.

I think we had a very good proposal on the last strategy summary and we should not do again this discussion.

jdd

Am Montag, den 08.11.2010, 17:11 +0100 schrieb Martin Schlander:

Mandag den 8. november 2010 16:38:10 skrev Juergen Weigert:

...

On Nov 08, 10 16:27:12 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

...

pb@seat-1.com wrote:

...

On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 12:44:33 +0100

Andreas Jaeger aj@novell.com wrote:

...

create and distribute the world's most usable Linux

Yes!

+1.

I like it! Quite ambitious!

That is exactly what was on the openSUSE wiki frontpage for years.

It was bad then, and it's even worse now, because "usable" is either just an empty phrase that can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean, or it means "Aunt Tillie distro" - which we have spent months establishing is a bad fit for openSUSE and doesn't reflect reality.

There's also "create" and "distribute" in the sentence, which makes a lot of difference for me. For example, the openSUSE build service makes it easy to distribute. And of course, it is a helper for development, knowing how your project compiles on other distributions. The "world's most usable Linux" is something that depends on the users look at it. I, as a user, see the whole phrase as something like: "Ok, they want to be usable, even for my grandma, and by the same time create something new, innovative, and maintain it !".

And actually, that's the distribution I am looking for, both from the POV of a user or a developer.

Holger

Am Freitag, den 12.11.2010, 00:41 +0100 schrieb Pascal Bleser:

On 2010-11-08 17:42:09 (+0100), Holger Hetterich hhetter@novell.com wrote: [...]

...

[...] The "world's most usable Linux" is something that depends on the users look at it. I, as a user, see the whole phrase as something like: "Ok, they want to be usable, even for my grandma, and by the same time create something new, innovative, and maintain it !".

"Usable", as Martin wrote, is really a bad term to use IMHO. It is unclear, and everyone will have her own interpretation of that term. Some may even understand it as "accessible" (as in a11y).

You will always have a personal interpretation of an individual on any terms you have in a strategy statement. For example, what defines someone being a "professional" (used in other suggestions)? What will a "professional" from the film industry expect from a linux distribution for professionals?

Also, I don't have a problem in that someone understands it as accessible as in a11y, and having those in the target audience included.

The mission statement must be short and precise.

It is already short. The more precise you get, the more possible users will be lost. Is that the idea?

I wholeheartedly agree with the "explaining is losing" that was cited on this thread.

You will always have to explain it. There's no way around it.

...

And actually, that's the distribution I am looking for, both from the POV of a user or a developer.

But that is specifically what we do _not_ aim for, as of the strategy.

Again, having a strategy and defining a target audience does _not_ mean that openSUSE isn't usable for less or inexperienced users (my girlfriend and my daughter use it too, and neither of them are computer wizards).

I never had doubts on that.

It just means that our focus, during development and when we have to take decisions that can only go one way or another, we take the decision that favours our target audience.

And that would be to decide for the solution that provides the best usability, while trying to maintain a good platform for development and innovation. What is the problem?

Linux isn't exactly known for being usable for the masses. I think a distribution showing it can be usable is a remarkable goal.

Holger

cheers

Am Freitag, den 12.11.2010, 17:48 +0100 schrieb Kim Leyendecker:

Well I think a "professional" is a person who can install Linux on his or her own. You maybe laugh about this sentence, but I know people who can´t install Windows. They aren´t professionals I think. If they can´t install Windows, the maybe can´t install Linux too. A professional should know things like this:

• *What´s a swap-partition?
• *Where´s root?
• *Why I can´t running my Windows applications without wine or something

other?

Yes, that are questions they are important to me. A professional should be an advanced or power user. I think that´s say all.

Kim,

your definition of an advanced user or "professional" is perfectly fine to me. I am in doubt that a strategy statement using "professionals" or even "advanced users" is a good idea, as this will leave out all those who don't know what a swap partition is. And why should openSUSE not attract those people too?

One of the suggestions says "We Create and Distribute". If openSUSE manages do to exactly that, openSUSE will attract developers. (and I personally think openSUSE has all the ground technology to be able to). Power Users, or "professionals", or advanced users will follow automatically to where development takes place, as those are following software development better than others. At leasts that's my thinking.

There's no reason to leave those out who are not professional. In fact I believe a good portion of them are future contributers, once they discovered the power of linux.

Cheers, Holger

Regards, kdl

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Holger Hetterich Sent: Friday, November 12, 2010 8:32 AM To: opensuse-project@opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse-project] What's the latest on the strategy discussion?

Am Freitag, den 12.11.2010, 00:41 +0100 schrieb Pascal Bleser:

...

On 2010-11-08 17:42:09 (+0100), Holger Hetterich hhetter@novell.com wrote: [...]

...

[...] The "world's most usable Linux" is something that depends on the users look at it. I, as a user, see the whole phrase as something like: "Ok, they want to be usable, even for my grandma, and by the same time create something new, innovative, and maintain it !".

"Usable", as Martin wrote, is really a bad term to use IMHO. It is unclear, and everyone will have her own interpretation of that term. Some may even understand it as "accessible" (as in a11y).

You will always have a personal interpretation of an individual on any terms you have in a strategy statement. For example, what defines someone being a "professional" (used in other suggestions)? What will a "professional" from the film industry expect from a linux distribution for professionals?

Also, I don't have a problem in that someone understands it as accessible as in a11y, and having those in the target audience included.

...

The mission statement must be short and precise.

It is already short. The more precise you get, the more possible users will be lost. Is that the idea?

...

I wholeheartedly agree with the "explaining is losing" that was cited on this thread.

You will always have to explain it. There's no way around it.

...

...

And actually, that's the distribution I am looking for, both from the POV of a user or a developer.

But that is specifically what we do _not_ aim for, as of the strategy.

Again, having a strategy and defining a target audience does _not_ mean that openSUSE isn't usable for less or inexperienced users (my girlfriend and my daughter use it too, and neither of them are computer wizards).

I never had doubts on that.

...

It just means that our focus, during development and when we have to take decisions that can only go one way or another, we take the decision that favours our target audience.

And that would be to decide for the solution that provides the best usability, while trying to maintain a good platform for development and innovation. What is the problem?

Linux isn't exactly known for being usable for the masses. I think a distribution showing it can be usable is a remarkable goal.

Holger

...

cheers

-- Holger Hetterich, hhetter@novell.com, SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Nov 08, 10 17:11:49 +0100, Martin Schlander wrote:

...

...

...

Andreas Jaeger aj@novell.com wrote:

...

create and distribute the world's most usable Linux

Yes!

+1.

I like it! Quite ambitious!

That is exactly what was on the openSUSE wiki frontpage for years.

It was bad then, and it's even worse now, because "usable" is either just an empty phrase that can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean, or it means "Aunt Tillie distro" - which we have spent months establishing is a bad fit for openSUSE and doesn't reflect reality.

You are correct in that we need a sound definition, of what we understand by usable. (That definition is not part of the mission statement, but should be prepared too). I understand 'more usable' in terms of making it more efficient in a general sense. Not in the sense of simplification that would hinder complex work.

I disagree with the conclusion that we should not strive for a usable system. To me, aunt Tillie's name conveys the idea of a disrespected end user. I wouldn't want to discriminate against any user group in the mission statement.

cheers, JW-

Le 08/11/2010 18:39, Peter Linnell a écrit :

Agreed there as well. My non-geek wife is perfectly at ease with any of my desktops or laptops running openSUSE :) Even better she likes them better than my macbook :-)

from memory, the strategy project say that we don't "aim' to unexperienced user, with the exception of the ones backed up by a power user :-))

I just do like you do, with one of my daugthers.

jdd

2010/11/8 jdd jdd@dodin.org:

Le 08/11/2010 18:39, Peter Linnell a écrit :

...

Agreed there as well. My non-geek wife is perfectly at ease with any of my desktops or laptops running openSUSE :) Even better she likes them better than my macbook :-)

from memory, the strategy project say that we don't "aim' to unexperienced user, with the exception of the ones backed up by a power user :-))

I strongly disagree with that,isn't that why forums exist? To help the unexperienced user? If what you say is true I would be still using windows or Ubuntu,along with many others. Also making unexperienced users use openSUSE should be one of our top priorities. There are much more difficult distributions... and http://forums.opensuse.org/ is one of the best forums on quality I have ever been too.

I just do like you do, with one of my daugthers.

jdd

-- http://www.dodin.net http://pizzanetti.fr -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help@opensuse.org

On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 08:13:41 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

...

I strongly disagree with that,isn't that why forums exist? To help the unexperienced user?

Fora are there because some people prefer that style of interface. For some reason it does appear to be particularly attractive to less experienced users.

I think what Kostas is talking about is not "fora" like the openSUSE Forums, but rather "online discussion venues", whether they be web-based forums, newsgroups, mailing lists, etc. IOW, I think he's talking in a more generic sense.

Building on what I wrote a couple minutes ago, I would see "providing community support venues" as a part of the definition of "usable" in the broader sense of the proposed mission statement. I would also probably include end-user training (formal and informal) as part of what helps us meet that goal of being "usable".

Jim

On Tuesday 09 November 2010 08:13:41 Per Jessen wrote:

Kostas Koudaras wrote:

...

2010/11/8 jdd jdd@dodin.org:

...

Le 08/11/2010 18:39, Peter Linnell a écrit :

...

Agreed there as well. My non-geek wife is perfectly at ease with any of my desktops or laptops running openSUSE :) Even better she likes them better than my macbook :-)

from memory, the strategy project say that we don't "aim' to unexperienced user, with the exception of the ones backed up by a power user :-))

I strongly disagree with that,isn't that why forums exist? To help the unexperienced user?

Fora are there because some people prefer that style of interface. For some reason it does appear to be particularly attractive to less experienced users.

...

If what you say is true I would be still using windows or Ubuntu, along with many others. Also making unexperienced users use openSUSE should be one of our top priorities.

Well, it's not where the latest strategy discussions have been heading.

Actually, if this unexperienced user wants to learn, openSUSE is perfect for him/her... That was definately part of the strategy discussion.

Jim Henderson wrote:

I think that's something I haven't entirely seen conveyed in the strategy discussion (though I got busy and have missed some of the discussion over the past few weeks).

Questions that a definition for "usable" needs to answer are:

• For Whom? (ie, who is the target audience?)
• How will we achieve that goal?
• How will we measure our success in this area?

There are probably other questions that it should answer as well.

Top-level mission statements and strategies never (or only extremely rarely) come in the SMART format:

Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Timely

In the average organisation, the SMARTness (if practiced at all) is usually only introduced at the lower levels, i.e. departmental and personal.

I think your question "for whom" is covered by the strategy proposal, as well as "how will we achieve that goal", but I have not seen any suggestions on how to measure our success.

Le 11/11/2010 20:02, Jim Henderson a écrit :

thing to identify measures for). If we can't measure our success, then by definition we don't know if we're being successful in achieving the

we can hace a clue by the number of hits on download.opensuse.org, or only on the update cals

but of course we can't know who do the request

jdd

Jim Henderson wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 08:35:50 +0100, Per Jessen wrote:

...

Top-level mission statements and strategies never (or only extremely rarely) come in the SMART format:

Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Timely

Right, but those are the questions that a mission statement/strategy beg to be asked, and they need to be answered even if they're not part of the actual declaration.

Giddyup, Don Quijote. :-)

We, i.e. the openSUSE project, are nowhere near organised enough to begin contemplating answering such questions. I also don't think we really need to, certainly not at the moment.

"Opensuse aims to enable professional users by becoming the number one portal for the development, distribution, and use of linux software."

On 11/10/10 19:03, Jim Henderson wrote:

Questions that a definition for "usable" needs to answer are:

• For Whom? (ie, who is the target audience?)
• How will we achieve that goal?
• How will we measure our success in this area?

There are probably other questions that it should answer as well.

Jim

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:27:17 +0000, Matt Gray wrote:

"Opensuse aims to enable professional users by becoming the number one portal for the development, distribution, and use of linux software."

How do we define a "professional user"?

ie, is a professional user a:

* Computing professional * IT person * Enterprise user * Advanced home user (and if so, how do we define "advanced"?)

Jim

Am Thu, 11 Nov 2010 20:28:35 +0100 schrieb "Kim Leyendecker" kimleyendecker@hotmail.de :

...

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:27:17 +0000, Matt Gray wrote:

"Opensuse aims to enable professional users by becoming the number one portal for the development, distribution, and use of linux software."

How do we define a "professional user"?

ie, is a professional user a:

• Computing professional
• IT person
• Enterprise user
• Advanced home user (and if so, how do we define "advanced"?)

I think a professional user is that all. But the Enterprise User can use SUSE Linux Enterprise. That´s not the "problem" of openSUSE. I think he means an advanced user. In my eyes, this is a user who can install software via the terminal, know how Linux works and maybe who can write code in C.

If you’re explaining, you’re losing

Well, do you know SUSE Linux Personal or SUSE Linux Professional? I think so.

I´ve got an concept that maybe can stop them. I use this for my own distribution I´ve built with SUSE Studio.

This concept looks like this:

openSUSE: This system is for the beginners and for "home-users".

openSUSE Professional: This system is for advanced users who can work with a system that´s maybe must be administrate over the terminal.

But I think today openSUSE is a distribution for both user groups.

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Jim Henderson Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:44 PM To: opensuse-project@opensuse.org Subject: [opensuse-project] Re: What's the latest on the strategy discussion?

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 20:28:35 +0100, Kim Leyendecker wrote:

...

How do we define a "professional user"?

ie, is a professional user a:

• Computing professional
• IT person
• Enterprise user
• Advanced home user (and if so, how do we define "advanced"?)

I think a professional user is that all. But the Enterprise User can use SUSE Linux Enterprise. That´s not the "problem" of openSUSE. I think he means an advanced user. In my eyes, this is a user who can install software via the terminal, know how Linux works and maybe who can write code in C.

We have a fairly significant audience that is non-coders, though.

"Advanced" is also a fairly ambiguous term - but also we have to have "beginner" users, otherwise people don't grow into "advanced". That would imply (to me) that our intention to grow our user community is to take users who got their start on other distributions. I would think we'd want to grow our community by taking users from the Windows (and other desktop/server OS) user base.

Otherwise, we're really talking about a Linux for Linux users, and I think that limits our userbase too much.

Jim

On Thursday 11 November 2010 20:28:35 wrote Kim Leyendecker:

...

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:27:17 +0000, Matt Gray wrote:

"Opensuse aims to enable professional users by becoming the number one portal for the development, distribution, and use of linux software."

How do we define a "professional user"?

ie, is a professional user a:

• Computing professional
• IT person
• Enterprise user
• Advanced home user (and if so, how do we define "advanced"?)

I think a professional user is that all. But the Enterprise User can use SUSE Linux Enterprise. That´s not the "problem" of openSUSE. I think he means an advanced user. In my eyes, this is a user who can install software via the terminal, know how Linux works and maybe who can write code in C.

Regards,

kdl

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Jim Henderson Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2010 7:59 PM To: opensuse-project@opensuse.org Subject: [opensuse-project] Re: What's the latest on the strategy discussion?

On Thu, 11 Nov 2010 09:27:17 +0000, Matt Gray wrote:

...

"Opensuse aims to enable professional users by becoming the number one portal for the development, distribution, and use of linux software."

How do we define a "professional user"?

ie, is a professional user a:

• Computing professional
• IT person
• Enterprise user
• Advanced home user (and if so, how do we define "advanced"?)

Jim

I personally don't like the term "professional" very much, because many things can be professional. In the strategy discussion we moved on, defining the target user as the "interested user who is willing to learn". Such a user is able (and willing) e.g. to use a forum. We don't have the ressources to spoonfeed too many and we don't want to limit the flexibility of the user by making it "aunt tilly"-friendly.

For more detaily see the strategy proposal here: https://lite.co-ment.com/text/lNPCgzeGHdV/view/ (This site requires Firefox. Konqueror and Rekonq are not working properly.)

Cheers, Thomas

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 00:27:23 +0100, Thomas Thym wrote:

I personally don't like the term "professional" very much, because many things can be professional. In the strategy discussion we moved on, defining the target user as the "interested user who is willing to learn".

Thanks for that info, I hadn't seen that in what I read, but I think that definition is much more meaningful. :-)

Jim

...

...

"Opensuse aims to enable professional users by becoming the number one portal for the development, distribution, and use of linux software.

How do we define a "professional user"?

ie, is a professional user a:

• Computing professional
• IT person
• Enterprise user
• Advanced home user (and if so, how do we define "advanced"?)

Jim

good question, but i'd like to say it certainly isn't exclusive to those who know how to use the command line or code C, as suggested above.

i certainly cannot do the above, but I work in an office that uses gentoo and blender all day long, these I would consider professional users.

Can I make a suggestion: that we separate the definition of the detail from the strategy itself. These definitions should be in an appendix to the strategy (and will probably change over time). The strategy (e.g. for the professional user) should stay more or less the same.

If we agree to this, we need to create a list of the main words or phrases which need definition as we go along, and then come back to them (or choose a small group of people who care) to create a definition.

This way we can agree the strategy without spending weeks discussing in detail such concepts as "professional" or "power user" or "meritocracy".

David

Op vrijdag 12 november 2010 21:07:20 schreef Jim Henderson:

How do you propose we reach agreement on a strategy prior to defining the terms used in the strategy?

ie, if we agree that openSUSE is for "professional users", how would you expect anyone to agree on that strategy without a definition for what a "professional user" is?

Simple, any user who considers him/herself a "professional user".

Yes, that´s looks good. I think a professional user is a person, who works as admin. But he can be a person who likes computers, especially running Linux and he know many about this system and his issues or something like this. I think, a professional user can be put in two groups:

- Nerds, Geeks and Hackers: I think this is explaining by his self.

- The Home/Business-Pro: He knows many about Linux, can fix the system and do the things Raiko M. says before.

regards kdl

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Rajko M. Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 6:04 AM To: opensuse-project@opensuse.org Subject: Re: [opensuse-project] Re: What's the latest on the strategy discussion?

On Friday 12 November 2010 14:20:55 Freek de Kruijf wrote:

Op vrijdag 12 november 2010 21:07:20 schreef Jim Henderson:

...

How do you propose we reach agreement on a strategy prior to defining the terms used in the strategy?

ie, if we agree that openSUSE is for "professional users", how would you expect anyone to agree on that strategy without a definition for what a "professional user" is?

Simple, any user who considers him/herself a "professional user".

Yes, that is one of options :)

My understanding of professional use case, in its widest meaning, is that there should be no interruptions in daily work, but if it comes to problems way back to stable environment should be as easy and fast as possible.

What that means in practice?

A lot of improvements to current defaults, like: * take special care of software that can break whole system, ** list all packages that can do that * keep old copy handy for easy replay, ** above listed packages will always have backup copy * make one stable kernel always present as alternative, ** to prevent guesswork, let user decide which kernel is stable

Power users than can fix system, will benefit from having easy replay, because they will spend lesser time reverting problematic changes, more doing what they think it is a purpose of computers.

Distro will benefit from such system as users will not be afraid to install newer versions if going back to working stuff is easy. Where easy doesn't mean: going to YaST Software Management and digging in tabs (Version) to find some numbers as versions, without notion of last installed , previous installed.

Op 14-11-10 00:35, Rajko M. schreef:

On Saturday 13 November 2010 14:58:18 Kim Leyendecker wrote:

...

Yes, that´s looks good. I think a professional user is a person, who works as admin. But he can be a person who likes computers, especially running Linux and he know many about this system and his issues or something like this. I think, a professional user can be put in two groups:

• Nerds, Geeks and Hackers: I think this is explaining by his self.

• The Home/Business-Pro: He knows many about Linux, can fix the system and

do the things Raiko M. says before.

Kim,

When we talk about professional, it is not only about computer and Linux skills, but even if we narrow that to Linux professional, it is impossible to know all aspects of Linux computing equally good. Even Linux professional will appreciate that system as a whole is stable, so that he can play with components that he knows good.

Professionals in other branches need stable system, so that they can actually use software that is specific for their expertize, which can help adoption rates when other around them see that computer just works.

When we go one step down to the Linux power user, a need for overall stability is still present, as it is better to do something useful, even if that is still attempt to break something, then to spend time fixing the system.

Then we can go one more step lower to the users that can understand instructions how to fix a problem, but with much more lost time. They need their computer running, as they probably want to do something else.

All users benefit from stable system, but having time for something else, is useful for openSUSE too, like translating in their language, help fixing usability bugs, planing next event, helping new users, installing openSUSE to other people's computers (with confidence it will work), learning how to use graphic programs, learning principles of graphic design, trying to connect their instruments to computer, and so on.

Next step down in Linux skill level are new users that need stable system to use it at all. They don't know how to fix system, they don't know much how to configure system, but with stable system they have chance to learn how to use it.

BTW, providing system that works nicely means much more time will be spent on surrounding activities, not fighting bugs that majority are anyway not qualified to do, not even to provide reasonably good feedback without a lot of hand holding.

One of problems that openSUSE had in previous releases is too many annoyances that can be overcome with some Linux experience, but I don't see the question: "How many other people such experienced user can serve, after he is done with his computer?"

In other words, increasing quality will give chance current users to spread openSUSE, not just word about it :)

...

regards kdl

Very sound and sane spoken Rajko....

On Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:20:55 +0100, Freek de Kruijf wrote:

Op vrijdag 12 november 2010 21:07:20 schreef Jim Henderson:

...

How do you propose we reach agreement on a strategy prior to defining the terms used in the strategy?

ie, if we agree that openSUSE is for "professional users", how would you expect anyone to agree on that strategy without a definition for what a "professional user" is?

Simple, any user who considers him/herself a "professional user".

That makes it a pretty difficult target to hit, since every single user of openSUSE can define themselves as a "professional user" and then say "and it doesn't work for me".

I think we need to define it, not say "we make this distribution for what every individual user decides is a professional user by selecting openSUSE".

I get what you're saying: self-selection. I just don't see that working since it'd be fairly difficult to build to a target of self-selecting individuals.

Jim