Hi, i've sent my membership application on the first round of announcements for the vote around the 19th September. Is there a time frame when to expect an answer? Cheers, Bernd Am Mo., 30. Sept. 2019 um 10:35 Uhr schrieb Stefan Seyfried :

Am 30.09.19 um 09:54 schrieb Ish Sookun:

...

Dear members,

Following discussions about the “openSUSE Project logo & name change” that started in June on the openSUSE Project mailing list [1], the Election Committee received a request from the Board to conduct a vote whereby openSUSE members can indicate whether they are for or against the project name change.

The voting will start on Oct 10 and end on Oct 31, which will provide three weeks for members to vote. The result will be announced on Nov 1.

The voting exercise is limited to openSUSE members only.

The voting procedure will be similar to the board elections. Members will receive a voting link on their membership email alias, i.e @opensuse.org. Members should verify that their openSUSE email alias is working and redirecting to the correct email address. If you experience troubles with your email alias, please email admin@opensuse.org to resolve the issue.

I did on Sept 19th and this is not yet fixed, so this is scheduled much too early.

: host mx1.suse.de[195.135.220.2] said: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in virtual alias table (in reply to RCPT TO command)

...

Members who wish to change the target address of their email alias can do so by sending the change request to admin@opensuse.org.

Well, but not as quick as you imply.

...

Those who wish to become an openSUSE member they can apply for membership by following the instructions specified on the openSUSE Wiki page [2].

The Election Committee can be reached through election-officials@opensuse.org.

-- Stefan Seyfried

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

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

On 9/30/19 6:05 PM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

Am 30.09.19 um 09:54 schrieb Ish Sookun:

...

Dear members,

Following discussions about the “openSUSE Project logo & name change” that started in June on the openSUSE Project mailing list [1], the Election Committee received a request from the Board to conduct a vote whereby openSUSE members can indicate whether they are for or against the project name change.

The voting will start on Oct 10 and end on Oct 31, which will provide three weeks for members to vote. The result will be announced on Nov 1.

The voting exercise is limited to openSUSE members only.

The voting procedure will be similar to the board elections. Members will receive a voting link on their membership email alias, i.e @opensuse.org. Members should verify that their openSUSE email alias is working and redirecting to the correct email address. If you experience troubles with your email alias, please email admin@opensuse.org to resolve the issue.

I did on Sept 19th and this is not yet fixed, so this is scheduled much too early.

We should mention that the vote is currently "scheduled" to start on this date. Before the vote starts we will be checking with the Heroes and Membership committee to ensure that there are no outstanding issues and if there is some the vote will be delayed. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hi Stefan, On 9/30/19 12:35 PM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:

I did on Sept 19th and this is not yet fixed, so this is scheduled much too early.

: host mx1.suse.de[195.135.220.2] said: 550 5.1.1 : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in virtual alias table (in reply to RCPT TO command)

Did the heroes confirm that the requested change was made? Regards, Ish Sookun -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am 30.09.19 um 15:37 schrieb Henne Vogelsang:

...

== For keeping the current name == This option is also known as: No one has to do a thing. Not a single hand, of the people that actually do things, has to move over the keyboard and do work if we keep the name openSUSE. People can spend the little time they have on the work we_have_ to do as project.

...

== For Changing the name == This option is also know as: A sh*tload of work. We don't even know all the dimensions in which this would generate things to do. Lots of hands, of the people who actually do things, will have to fly countless hours over the keyboard if we change the name away from openSUSE. Hours they can't spend on the work we_have_ to do as project.

Both points assume that only people currently contributing to the project will jump in for the upcoming name change work to be done. This could be fixed in the openSUSE spirit of a do-a-cracy: if there are enough people stepping up to work on the name change process, it will be done. If not then there's no harm aside the communities vote not being fulfilled. Regards, vinz. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

In my opinion it's a bit unreasonable to assume that something as tedious as changing the name of something would suddenly spark a rise in contributors. Why would it?

It's not just the renaming but the whole process of building a (somewhat) new brand. That's why there is some possible interest.

Especially as the existing contributors are not even set up anymore to onboard people. Look at all the failed attempts for people to "help" with general purpose infrastructure, our main announcement channel (news.o.o), our main documentation page (wiki.o.o), the system we organize our community with (connect.o.o) and so on and so on.

I wish I would share your optimism. I don't.

Oh, you must have misinterpreted my writings. Speaking of the wiki, news or general opensuse.org I have no optimism at all as I got a bloody nose myself thanks to hardly any interest. Regards, vinz. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am 30.09.19 um 17:42 schrieb Vinzenz Vietzke:

...

In my opinion it's a bit unreasonable to assume that something as tedious as changing the name of something would suddenly spark a rise in contributors. Why would it?

It's not just the renaming but the whole process of building a (somewhat) new brand. That's why there is some possible interest.

I have to admit that I haven't followed all the discussions really tightly, but I wonder if it was discussed that the people who are interested in a new brand simply build one, and use openSUSE as a base? I think it should be possible to build a new project/distro and name it differently but consume openSUSE as a base. Not that I think that would make sense, but it would not harm openSUSE by a name change, and the interested people could start right away having fun and success... And maybe contribute back here and there. How about that thought model? Klaas

...

Especially as the existing contributors are not even set up anymore to onboard people. Look at all the failed attempts for people to "help" with general purpose infrastructure, our main announcement channel (news.o.o), our main documentation page (wiki.o.o), the system we organize our community with (connect.o.o) and so on and so on.

I wish I would share your optimism. I don't.

Oh, you must have misinterpreted my writings. Speaking of the wiki, news or general opensuse.org I have no optimism at all as I got a bloody nose myself thanks to hardly any interest.

Regards, vinz.

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

On 10/1/19 12:01 AM, jdd@dodin.org wrote:

Le 30/09/2019 à 14:18, Simon Lees a écrit :

...

This is not to say that an openSUSE foundation will neccesarily hold the openSUSE trademarks

I would like to have clarified the fact that what mean "name change"

IMHO, the *foundation* name and the *project* name do not have to be the same. Ubuntu is backed by Canonical... not the same name at all.

so why is the vote for? Name of the project? Name of the foundation?

In the context of the original discussion it was about "branding" and this vote is about dropping / replacing the openSUSE brand everywhere with something different. If the resault of the vote is "no cbange" then the board will try its hardest to use openSUSE in the foundation name unless we find that its not in the projects interest due to legal issues, then we will propose calling the foundation something else. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Simon Lees wrote:

On 10/1/19 12:01 AM, jdd@dodin.org wrote:

...

Le 30/09/2019 à 14:18, Simon Lees a écrit :

...

This is not to say that an openSUSE foundation will neccesarily hold the openSUSE trademarks

I would like to have clarified the fact that what mean "name change"

IMHO, the *foundation* name and the *project* name do not have to be the same. Ubuntu is backed by Canonical... not the same name at all.

so why is the vote for? Name of the project? Name of the foundation?

In the context of the original discussion it was about "branding" and this vote is about dropping / replacing the openSUSE brand everywhere with something different.

So the answer is "*both* the project *and* the foundation, *and* anywhere else it occurs"? Just checking my understanding of what "branding" actually means in this context. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 1 Oct 2019, at 10:29, Stasiek Michalski wrote:

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:31 PM, jdd@dodin.org wrote:

...

Le 30/09/2019 à 14:18, Simon Lees a écrit :

...

This is not to say that an openSUSE foundation will neccesarily hold the openSUSE trademarks I would like to have clarified the fact that what mean "name change" IMHO, the *foundation* name and the *project* name do not have to be the same. Ubuntu is backed by Canonical... not the same name at all. so why is the vote for? Name of the project? Name of the foundation?

This is a huge simplification of how Ubuntu and Canonical operate, Ubuntu has Ubuntu Foundation, which is supported by Canonical. Ubuntu by itself is a name for `Foundation`, what we would call `Project` and the `Distribution`. For us openSUSE is a name for the `Project` and that's it.

A few lightweight comments: 1) this question reminds me strangely of the Brexit referendum as it’s a simple question with one path familiar and the other totally undefined. I think it will produce the same kind of result … people dissatisfied with the status-quo will vote against without voting for something deliverable. 2) at the same time as they vote, if they choose “change" they should be asked how much time they will contribute. If the answer is zero, their vote is discarded. If it’s some time, then keep them to their commitment. 3) the openSUSE brand is long inthe market and well recognised. Why are we proposing to throw away that value? Yours David-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 2:06 PM, george kanakis wrote:

On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 13:54, Administrator wrote:

...

...

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 4:31 PM, jdd@dodin.org wrote:

...

Le 30/09/2019 à 14:18, Simon Lees a écrit :

...

This is not to say that an openSUSE foundation will neccesarily hold the openSUSE trademarks I would like to have clarified the fact that what mean "name change" IMHO, the *foundation* name and the *project* name do not have to be the same. Ubuntu is backed by Canonical... not the same name at all. so why is the vote for? Name of the project? Name of the foundation?

This is a huge simplification of how Ubuntu and Canonical operate, Ubuntu has Ubuntu Foundation, which is supported by Canonical. Ubuntu by itself is a name for `Foundation`, what we would call `Project` and the `Distribution`. For us openSUSE is a name for the `Project` and

On 1 Oct 2019, at 10:29, Stasiek Michalski wrote: that's

...

it.

A few lightweight comments:

1) this question reminds me strangely of the Brexit referendum as it’s a simple question with one path familiar and the other totally undefined. I think it will produce the same kind of result … people dissatisfied with the status-quo will vote against without voting for something deliverable.

2) at the same time as they vote, if they choose “change" they should be asked how much time they will contribute. If the answer is zero, their vote is discarded. If it’s some time, then keep them to their commitment.

3) the openSUSE brand is long inthe market and well recognised. Why are we proposing to throw away that value?

Yours David-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

As a non-member and not able to vote, i can only state my opinion.

I consider the point fact that a foundation is needed and it may be required to be disconnected from SUSE but the openSUSE brand name is not to be thrown away so lightly.

The foundation can have a different name and the project can keep its original name which make it well-known around the opensource world.

In the end, none of this might matter, legally using a trademark is using a trademark, in whichever context we need to use it. Project isn't magically outside the law when the foundation has a different name. LCP [Stasiek] https://lcp.world -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hey, On 01.10.19 13:54, Administrator wrote:

1) this question reminds me strangely of the Brexit referendum as it’s a simple question with one path familiar and the other totally undefined. I think it will produce the same kind of result … people dissatisfied with the status-quo will vote against without voting for something deliverable.

A friend of mine mentioned the same thing yesterday evening when I was explaining the situation and discussing it with them. I must admit, it also rings true for me... Can someone from the board please comment on this? You are proposing to put this vote to the membership right? Have you thought and discussed about the validity/gravity of this kind of question? Henne -- Henne Vogelsang http://www.opensuse.org Everybody has a plan, until they get hit. - Mike Tyson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 01/10/2019 22.20, Axel Braun wrote:

Hello Henne,

Am Dienstag, 1. Oktober 2019, 16:20:10 CEST schrieb Henne Vogelsang:

...

On 01.10.19 13:54, Administrator wrote:

...

1) this question reminds me strangely of the Brexit referendum as it’s a simple question with one path familiar and the other totally undefined. I think it will produce the same kind of result … people dissatisfied with the status-quo will vote against without voting for something deliverable. A friend of mine mentioned the same thing yesterday evening when I was explaining the situation and discussing it with them. I must admit, it also rings true for me...

Can someone from the board please comment on this? You are proposing to put this vote to the membership right? Have you thought and discussed about the validity/gravity of this kind of question?

Yes we have. The question / idea was raised to the board on the last openSUSE conference. There was already a longer mail discussion about this, and all pro/con were mentioned. As we are on the edge of a new era (legal structure/foundation) it would now be the time to change the name - if the majority of members want this . We as board discussed as well, but personal opinions of board members do not count in that context.

Anyway, we have to respect the desire of the community, and this is why the poll will take place as announced.

Different to the Brexit, we are not politicians, and nobody needs to give the Board a 'Denkzettel' (hopefully). Every member should be aware that each vote counts, and each vote can be the decision taking one.

So please vote according to your personal opinion, not for any 'political agenda'. And, most important, vote!

What if one does not know? Will there be a "blank" option? -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 15.1 (Legolas))

On 10/2/19 3:58 PM, Axel Braun wrote:

Am Mittwoch, 2. Oktober 2019, 01:05:11 CEST schrieb Carlos E. R.:

<snip>

...

...

So please vote according to your personal opinion, not for any 'political agenda'. And, most important, vote!

What if one does not know? Will there be a "blank" option?

We can consider this (cc'ing election officials)

But what would a blank option mean? would it esentially be the same as not voting? id rather not add complexity here unless its really needed. Not voting is still a valid option. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 02/10/2019 09.32, Axel Braun wrote:

Am Mittwoch, 2. Oktober 2019, 09:05:10 CEST schrieb Simon Lees:

...

...

...

What if one does not know? Will there be a "blank" option?

We can consider this (cc'ing election officials)

But what would a blank option mean? would it esentially be the same as not voting? id rather not add complexity here unless its really needed. Not voting is still a valid option.

Not voting or having no opinion is something different. In the first case people are mostly not interested, in the second they are, but have no preference for any of the choices.

Exactly. A blank vote means that the people take the effort of voting, so they show interest, but for whatever reason they don't choose one of the options. The percent of voters change. If you (officials) do not add it, you are forcing me to not vote. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)

Hey, On 01.10.19 22:20, Axel Braun wrote:

Am Dienstag, 1. Oktober 2019, 16:20:10 CEST schrieb Henne Vogelsang:

...

On 01.10.19 13:54, Administrator wrote:

...

1) this question reminds me strangely of the Brexit referendum as it’s a simple question with one path familiar and the other totally undefined. I think it will produce the same kind of result … people dissatisfied with the status-quo will vote against without voting for something deliverable. A friend of mine mentioned the same thing yesterday evening when I was explaining the situation and discussing it with them. I must admit, it also rings true for me...

Can someone from the board please comment on this? You are proposing to put this vote to the membership right? Have you thought and discussed about the validity/gravity of this kind of question?

Yes we have. The question / idea was raised to the board on the last openSUSE conference. There was already a longer mail discussion about this, and all pro/con were mentioned.

There has been a discussion on the mailinglist/github and people have expressed their opinion, this is cool. But this discussion evolved around a pretty incomplete problem statement which vaguely describes the reality (the current state) BUT COMPLETELY omits the ideal (the desired state for the project) we want to end up with, also the consequences (the impact on the project) this decision has. And most importantly it also omits the proposal (describing the potential solutions to handle the impact) how we are going to achieve this name change. All of this is unclear as of today!

As we are on the edge of a new era (legal structure/foundation) it would now be the time to change the name - if the majority of members want this .

I understand that there is a timing issue involved here. However, there is no need for rush right?

We as board discussed as well, but personal opinions of board members do not count in that context.

What do you mean by that? I don't understand. We elected all of you because we believe that your personal opinions are somewhat similar to our opinions and that you will represent our vote. Your personal opinion is the only thing that matters.

Anyway, we have to respect the desire of the community, and this is why the poll will take place as announced.

I understand the purpose of voting. But who exactly is responsible for putting exactly *this* question forward? The board right?

Different to the Brexit, we are not politicians, and nobody needs to give the Board a 'Denkzettel' (hopefully).

I'm not worried that this has something to do with expressing personal dissatisfaction to anyone (especially not to the board) or politics.

Every member should be aware that each vote counts, and each vote can be the decision taking one.

I am worried about the content (and type) of question you put forward. One option I can vote for (not changing) is exactly defined. The other option you put forward (change the name) is completely undefined and vague. If we don't change, nothing happens and everything stays at it is, and most people know how things are currently. Nobody even has an idea of an overview of what will and would need to happen if we change the name. See Simons mail for instance, the description of the reasons to changing the name are very concise and practical. The reasons to not change the name are abstract and imprecise. So if you put the vote forward like that, people will have a vote on something they can imagine very well (a.k.a. status quo) versus some *undefined* future. Into the undefined, exactly because it's so boundless and vague, you can interpret everything that you might want to have changed in openSUSE, no matter if that really changes or not after the vote. One of the decisions is informed, the other one uninformed. This is dangerous territory! You *must* see this. I urge you to re-consider and come up with a vote where the consequences, of *both* options people can vote for, are as clearly defined as you can. This is your job as leaders of this project! Henne p.s. My personal opinion on the name change doesn't matter for this argument, please do not fall into the trap that I think of one better than the other. I'm purely worried about the vote itself. -- Henne Vogelsang http://www.opensuse.org Everybody has a plan, until they get hit. - Mike Tyson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Wed, 2019-10-02 at 15:18 +0200, Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:

On 2019-10-02T13:44:21, Henne Vogelsang wrote:

...

But this discussion evolved around a pretty incomplete problem statement which vaguely describes the reality (the current state) BUT COMPLETELY omits the ideal (the desired state for the project) we want to end up with, also the consequences (the impact on the project) this decision has. And most importantly it also omits the proposal (describing the potential solutions to handle the impact) how we are going to achieve this name change. All of this is unclear as of today!

Indeed.

Name changes create a *huge* effort down the line, loss of awareness etc.

Before someone can put forward a coherent argument as to the why *and* the how for this option, a vote should IMNSHO not be held.

Not holding this vote now commits the Project and it's Board to a long drawn out series of negotiations with SUSE regarding the possibilities of the Foundation being able to own or use the openSUSE Trademarks. It's entirely possible, even with the negotiations carried out in good faith and with the best of goodwill, that the outcome of those negotiations result in the Foundation not being able to use the openSUSE marks to the satisfaction of the Board or the community at large. And in the event of such an outcome the community will be either effectively forced to retain the name but not operate an independant foundation under that name (hindering its effectiveness - see: the lessons cited by the Board in their investigation from the TDF/LibreOffice differences), or forced to change the name. Personally speaking, I'd rather we have this vote, so we know where the community stands on the topic. If we vote for a name change, we know the route and can focus on that as a collective group, playing our strongest hand as a community because we've chosen it. If we vote against a namechange, we give the Board the strongest hand possible in their complex negotiations with SUSE because it makes it crystal clear what we want and what the stakes are if they fail to come to a satisfactory aggreement. Leaving the question open, just makes things harder for everyone in the short, medium, and long terms in my view. -- Richard Brown Linux Distribution Engineer - Future Technology Team Phone +4991174053-361 SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, D-90409 Nuernberg HRB 247165, AG München GF: Felix Imendörffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:34 PM, Vincent Untz wrote:

(and I am also uncomfortable for reasons highlighted in other mails: because I strongly feel people do not correctly estimate the amount of work required for rebranding, because it's unclear how the results will be interpreted by the board, because I have no clue if this vote also will have an impact on the logo, etc.)

Logo vote is postponed until we figure out the name, it will happen in the future. LCP [Stasiek] https://lcp.world -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hey, On 04.10.19 14:00, Richard Brown wrote:

But the fact that the community doesn't have a singular clear view on this topic is precisely we need at least one vote to start piecing together a picture of where opinion lies.

Again, this isn't about voting or not voting. This is about what the board puts forward to the whole community to vote upon. Can we please concentrate on this? The board is expecting the electorate to make a decision on some matter that the board (or anyone they task) has not sufficiently hashed out. Even an indicative vote has to be an informed vote. I understand that it's a dirty job, but someone's got to do it. Henne -- Henne Vogelsang http://www.opensuse.org Everybody has a plan, until they get hit. - Mike Tyson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hi Adam, On 10/15/19 8:36 PM, Adam Spiers wrote:

But you *won't* know where the community stands on the topic if the already opened election is progressed to completion, for the reasons which many people have already pointed out.

We're in the process of compiling the arguments presented in various emails (it's not an easy task). They will be available on a wiki page with the vote process detailed. The vote can be extended to allow people to take a more informed decision. They can change their vote if they have already voted, should they wish so after consulting the wiki. Regards, Ish Sookun -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hi Adam, On 10/15/19 9:23 PM, Adam Spiers wrote:

That's great. How will voters find the wiki page though, if they don't closely follow the mailing lists?

We will announce an update related to the vote with the wiki link on news.o.o and shout on Twitter. We also rely on community members to spread the word about the wiki page if anyone comes seeking information. Regards, Ish Sookun -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Tue, 15 Oct 2019 20:58:58 +0400, Ish Sookun wrote:

The vote can be extended to allow people to take a more informed decision. They can change their vote if they have already voted, should they wish so after consulting the wiki.

There are plenty of possible scenarios where someone might be inclined to change their vote if they had more information. It seems like having a new vote would be better than just saying "you voted, so you can change it". Someone loses their access for whatever reason to the voting system (lost the e-mail, perhaps). Someone's on holiday during the extended period. If you want an accurate vote, provide the information up front, then have the vote. Don't start the vote and then provide more information and say "you can change your vote if you like". You'll end up with people voting based on different available information at the time they cast their vote. -- Jim Henderson Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Am 02.10.19 um 15:49 schrieb Richard Brown:

Hence the need for this vote to identify the desires of the community at large, which is necessary to justify the work required in either case.

But then this has to be clearly stated when voting: "Do you want the name of the project to be changed? [ ] Yes [ ] No Note that this is just a hint in which direction we will investigate and prepare. It is well possible, that changing the name will be too much work and will not happen, even if a majority of voters would want it. It is also possible that we have to change the name, even if nobody would want that. After the possibilities have been investigated, we might need to have another vote to make more informed decisions." Something like that. -- Stefan Seyfried "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 2. Oct 2019, at 17:46, Gerald Pfeifer wrote:

...

On Wed 2019-10-02, Richard Brown wrote: It is unreasnoble to expect SUSE and the openSUSE Board to conduct the months of work required to potentially keep openSUSE operating under the same name while having a Foundation if the community is open to changing the name of the Project.

Do you believe changing the name is going to be less effort? I am not convinced of that.

Absolutely not - both have significant effort - though changing the name has the advantage of being able to involve more of the community in the efforts.

...

Hence the need for this vote to identify the desires of the community at large, which is necessary to justify the work required in either case.

Is there sufficient information on the table for an informed decision?

("We don't have a plan how to do this, nor understanding what it implies, but let's leave the EU; life is going to be so much better then.")

Much of the work required for either is to investigate the information. I do not see this as a vote with a promise of a conclusion if either option is chosen, but a vote indicating which option the community wants the Project to work towards. BTW I really dislike the constant Brexit metaphors due to the deep personal impacts Brexit has, and likely will have, on my life and livelihood. Brexit is a topic I cannot discuss without significant heartache and tears. Therefore I’d personally appreciate if people could avoid bringing the comparison up unnecessarily.

...

On Wed 2019-10-02, Stefan Seyfried wrote: But then this has to be clearly stated when voting:

"Do you want the name of the project to be changed?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

Note that this is just a hint in which direction we will investigate and prepare. It is well possible, that changing the name will be too much work and will not happen, even if a majority of voters would want it. It is also possible that we have to change the name, even if nobody would want that. After the possibilities have been investigated, we might need to have another vote to make more informed decisions."

Something like that.

Agreed, that appears to be what the vote really is about.

Gerald -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

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

Richard Brown wrote:

I do not see this as a vote with a promise of a conclusion if either option is chosen, but a vote indicating which option the community wants the Project to work towards.

BTW I really dislike the constant Brexit metaphors due to the deep personal impacts Brexit has, and likely will have, on my life and livelihood. Brexit is a topic I cannot discuss without significant heartache and tears. Therefore I’d personally appreciate if people could avoid bringing the comparison up unnecessarily.

Brexit impacts me personally and deeply upsets me too. So I'm genuinely sympathetic and sorry to prolong your discomfort. But I'm afraid problems are not solved by pretending they don't exist, or by not learning from history. I initially objected when the comparison between this openSUSE vote and the Brexit referendum was first made, on the grounds the two votes are obviously vastly different. But I have since realised that despite the enormous differences in the *topics* of the votes, there are many disturbing parallels in the *way* in which the votes are being held. A huge amount of grief caused by Brexit could have been avoided if the vote had been conducted in a way which ensured voters were crystal clear what outcome they were voting for. Surely this is obvious, especially with the benefit of hindsight. Let's not repeat the same mistake here. N�����r��y隊Z)z{.��k�7��맲��r��z�^�ˬz��N�(�֜��^� ޭ隊Z)z{.��k�7���0�����Ǩ�

On 10/3/19 1:20 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:

Hey,.

On 02.10.19 15:49, Richard Brown wrote:

...

On Wed, 2019-10-02 at 13:44 +0200, Henne Vogelsang wrote:

...

So if you put the vote forward like that, people will have a vote on something they can imagine very well (a.k.a. status quo) versus some *undefined* future.

If the Project votes for not changing the name, I expect the following consequences

- The Board...

Yes, sure, this means the vote has potentially unbalanced outcomes - one option is immediately actionable with a goal that is immediately realisable and one is an option which is more uncertain.

To be as blunt as you taught me to be, such is life.

But that doesn't mean the board *should* just put life out for a vote to a group of people and expect them to do the right thing. Not if we expect something good coming out of this!

If something is as unclear as everything is right now the board can not rely on people to decide the right thing. It's the boards job to eat the bullet and make things clear and more balanced, sorry.

...

Regardless, either option compells the Project to months or years of work, and before any such large burden is undertaken, it should be well justified.

Then the board should step back and think about what it wants us to vote on. It's clearly not renaming the project!

If all of this is because of the foundation, and if you want to make sure that putting in work is justified, I would suggest something like:

In the ideal world our project would not be dependent on SUSE and run it's own legal entity to represent ourselves and what we do. A legal entity is mostly required for handling (receiving/giving) money, goods and services. For instance: $LIST_OF_EXAMPLES_WHAT_THE_LEGAL_ENTITY_DOES

In reality we don't have a legal entity and depend on SUSE to handle anything that requires one.

The consequences of *not* forming a foundation are: $COMPREHENSIVE_LIST_OF_DRAWBACKS_THE_CURRENT_SETUP_HAS

Forming the foundation will require: $COMPREHENSIVE_LIST_OF_THINGS_TO_DO (including decision if/else branches like the naming one, different foundation setups etc.)

Do you want the openSUSE Project to attempt to create a foundation:

- [ ] Yes - [ ] No - [ ] Abstain

Because this is the real question before us and it's your job¹ to hash this out and to make this clear if you want your members to vote on this.

From the consoltation the board did around osc19 and on the mailing list after we found that the general idea of creating a foundation is almost universally supported both within openSUSE's membership and SUSE's leadership. As such the board decided that a vote as you propose is unneccesary at this stage and that instead the board would proceed to create a detailed proposal of what the foundation would look like and how it will function and when everything is sorted out we will put a vote to the membership along the lines of would you like to replace the current openSUSE Board with an openSUSE Foundation as outlined in the following documents - [ ] Yes - [ ] No - [ ] Abstain The push for changing the name is not directly tied to the creation of a foundation. The group of members who feel that the project should rebrand to a different name would still feel that way even if we weren't looking at a foundation. It is obvious from the mailing list thread that was started that unlike creating a foundation there is no consensus around changing the name and that the percentage of membership asking for a change is not insignficant and therefore it would be unfair to those members if we didn't have a vote. The board after all is elected to represent the members. It would also be foolish of the board to go ahead and create an "openSUSE Foundation" now if a majority of members believe the project should be called something else because if that is the case dropping the openSUSE name will just come up again in a few years and at that point changing the foundation name will be near impossible. This is just another reason why the board feels its wisest to deal with this issue now before we get into the details of creating a foundation rather then sweeping it back under the rug for another few years because its hard controversial and incovinent. -- Simon Lees (Simotek) http://simotek.net Emergency Update Team keybase.io/simotek SUSE Linux Adelaide Australia, UTC+10:30 GPG Fingerprint: 5B87 DB9D 88DC F606 E489 CEC5 0922 C246 02F0 014B -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Hi, On 10/2/19 8:42 PM, Simon Lees wrote:

On 10/2/19 9:14 PM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:

...

Hey,

On 01.10.19 22:20, Axel Braun wrote:

...

Am Dienstag, 1. Oktober 2019, 16:20:10 CEST schrieb Henne Vogelsang: As we are on the edge of a new era (legal structure/foundation) it would now be the time to change the name - if the majority of members want this .

I understand that there is a timing issue involved here. However, there is no need for rush right?

This is currently the biggest blocker to setting up the foundation, as it dictates a significant amount of what our future negotiations with SUSE are.

Sorry, but from my perspective this is a perception issue. Based on, if I remember the conversational points from the earlier threads properly, circumstantial evidence from another project, The Document Foundation and Libre Office, and possibly mixed with some personal discomfort, it has been postulated that a name difference between a foundation, a project, and a product/products is not advantageous. However I would content that there is no hard data that substantiates a significant advantage of the idea that things have to have the same name. There is nothing really that would stop anyone from creating "The Green Geeks Foundation" with a charter that contains: "...This foundation is established for the sole purpose to support the openSUSE Project........." Then there is a legal entity that can receive money and based on the charter it is known to any external entity/sponsor where the proceeds of the foundation will be invested. This can be setup completely independently, does not require a vote and would provide a legal entity. The new legal entity can then undertake any negotiations that are deemed necessary w.r.t. trademarks etc. That the choice proposed to be presented for a vote is a convolution of topics is a result of us not making the effort to pry things apart and have clear communication about the individual levels/components of things that are more or less tangentially related. Having conversations about the individual parts can lead to decisions "in a vacuum", which generally do not turn out all that well. However, having conversations about the individual bits that are focused would certainly help to create clarity. One has to understand the individual pieces to put a puzzle together. Based on this thread I would say I am not the only one that doesn't have a clear understanding of all the moving parts and how they are supposed to fit together. I did read all the messages in this thread and in the earlier threads about the topic. Later, Robert -- Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU Distinguished Architect LINUX Technical Team Lead Public Cloud rjschwei@suse.com IRC: robjo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Le 02/10/2019 à 14:56, Vincent Untz a écrit :

My concern is similar to Henne's: we know there are people who will be willing to help, and I have no doubt they will help; but will we be able to cover all changes in a realistic timeframe?

Reading all what you say (not Vincent, everybody here), I think the way the vote is proposed is not the good way. We should do it someway like this: * ask for a group/team/whatsoever to propose an other name. This group (for example a member group in connect) could then make a campaign to promote his will among the members. *this* group would be responsible to make the transition happen and the result of the vote would most certainly depend of the way the group proves he can do the task. * of course there can be several groups, names, with the same conditions. * a other group should coordinate to defend the status quo, as it's not that evident now that the openSUSE brand is really backed by volunteers. after that (I see at least two month or more), a vote could be done jdd -- http://dodin.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

Dne středa 2. října 2019 16:24:58 CEST, Richard Brown napsal(a):

On Wed, 2019-10-02 at 16:08 +0200, jdd@dodin.org wrote:

...

Le 02/10/2019 à 14:56, Vincent Untz a écrit :

...

My concern is similar to Henne's: we know there are people who will be willing to help, and I have no doubt they will help; but will we be able to cover all changes in a realistic timeframe?

Reading all what you say (not Vincent, everybody here), I think the way the vote is proposed is not the good way. We should do it someway like this: * ask for a group/team/whatsoever to propose an other name. This group (for example a member group in connect) could then make a campaign to promote his will among the members. *this* group would be responsible to make the transition happen and the result of the vote would most certainly depend of the way the group proves he can do the task. * of course there can be several groups, names, with the same conditions. * a other group should coordinate to defend the status quo, as it's not that evident now that the openSUSE brand is really backed by volunteers. after that (I see at least two month or more), a vote could be done

I don't see the benefit of your approach Voting for a namechange requires lots of work afterwards to figure out what names are viable and likely require followup votes to decide a name. Voting for keeping the name requires lots of work afterwards to figure out how to form a viable independant Foundation with some element of control over it's own name, and will likely require follow up votes to ensure the community are happy with the constituational impacts of any negotiations in this area. I see the vote proposed by the Board as a choice to the community to help the Project decide which long road to walk down. Neither option is certain, neither option is easy or without potential problems arising that undermine the "decision" by the Project in this vote. But, the Project need to know what the Project wants, so we at least know which pile of work to spend time on. Because doing both - figuring out all the possible names, campaigning for it, etc is an insane amount of work to do if at the same time the Board are going to have to also be negotiating with SUSE about the consequences of keeping the name while forming the Foundation. It's really that simple. People shouldn't expect certainty from either decision. Both will cause this Project work. But what work do we want the Project to do is a GOOD question to ask.

It has been touched several times, I'm sorry I feel need to repeat it, for the voting, very comprehensive explanation of motivation to start the vote and all possible consequences of all results should be well described. I'd like to make an informed vote, but I'm not sure if I can foresee outcomes of my decision. I know many arguments were written in the discussion threads but I feel this information scattered around. I'm unable to summarize everything, but e.g. wiki page could help to clear up the discussion. -- Vojtěch Zeisek Komunita openSUSE GNU/Linuxu Community of the openSUSE GNU/Linux https://www.opensuse.org/ https://trapa.cz/

Le 02/10/2019 à 08:55, Simon Lees a écrit :

Enough of the people suggesting the change are very active in the openSUSE community especially around areas such as branding and design so in my opinion atleast there are enough willing volunteers that if the name change vote is successful they will be able to do the work required.

I also guess that there will be a "latence" period, where the necessary work will be prepared, and the change applied only is all is OK. anyway, I would like some comment about the recent news I have read about SUSE and openSUSE being allowed to live together, this is crucial if the change is dismissed thanks jdd -- http://dodin.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On 02/10/2019 22.08, Christian Boltz wrote:

Hello,

Am Mittwoch, 2. Oktober 2019, 09:21:09 CEST schrieb jdd@dodin.org:

...

Le 02/10/2019 à 08:55, Simon Lees a écrit :

...

Enough of the people suggesting the change are very active in the openSUSE community especially around areas such as branding and design so in my opinion atleast there are enough willing volunteers that if the name change vote is successful they will be able to do the work required. I also guess that there will be a "latence" period, where the necessary work will be prepared, and the change applied only is all is OK.

Yes, of course - _if_ the decision is to change the name, this won't happen over night. In that case, I'd expect a quite long transition period (IMHO at least a year). Think of it as somewhat similar to what we had in the past: "SUSE Linux 10.0 - made by the openSUSE project" (and same for 10.1). 10.2 was then named "openSUSE 10.2".

Needless to say that changing to a completely different name needs much more effort than "just" adding the "open" part.

...

anyway, I would like some comment about the recent news I have read about SUSE and openSUSE being allowed to live together, this is crucial if the change is dismissed

IANAL ;-) but I'll try nevertheless.

The short summary is that it's legally possible to let the openSUSE foundation use and/or own the openSUSE trademark, and let SUSE and openSUSE be competitors in the Linux market.

Of course this will need negotiations and finallly a contract between SUSE (who currently own the openSUSE trademark) and the openSUSE foundation to hand over the openSUSE trademark, but I'm sure this is doable and - personal opinion - worth the effort.

If we decide to change the name, we won't need such a contract (or only for the transition period) - but OTOH we'll have to spend lots of marketing efforts to make the new name known. My feeling is that this would be much more work than negotiating a contract with SUSE about the openSUSE trademark.

If one of the vote options would be to "keep name under the above conditions" I would vote for it. Which is not "keep name under the current conditions. The vote thus must have several options, not two... -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 15.0 x86_64 at Telcontar)

On Monday, 7 October 2019 17:36 Christian Boltz wrote:

As an example: Today, SUSE could in theory go crazy and deny using the "openSUSE" trademark instantly - simply because they own the trademark. (To make it clear: there's no indication they'll do this, and they would probably harm themself by doing so.) OTOH, when we have a foundation (and decide to keep the name "openSUSE"), we'll make sure that the foundation gets non-revokable permissions to use the openSUSE trademark, or even owns the trademark, which means SUSE wouldn't be able to stop us from using the name openSUSE.

If you want to go down this path and consider what could SUSE do to harm openSUSE project if they went crazy, do you think the name and trademark issue is the biggest problem? To me, it sounds a bit like the famous "If someone gets the password to your system, he can log in and change your desktop theme." Michal Kubecek -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org

On Tuesday, 8 October 2019 7:38 Stephan Kulow wrote:

Am 08.10.19 um 07:28 schrieb Michal Kubecek:

...

On Monday, 7 October 2019 17:36 Christian Boltz wrote:

...

As an example: Today, SUSE could in theory go crazy and deny using the "openSUSE" trademark instantly - simply because they own the trademark. (To make it clear: there's no indication they'll do this, and they would probably harm themself by doing so.) OTOH, when we have a foundation (and decide to keep the name "openSUSE"), we'll make sure that the foundation gets non-revokable permissions to use the openSUSE trademark, or even owns the trademark, which means SUSE wouldn't be able to stop us from using the name openSUSE.

If you want to go down this path and consider what could SUSE do to harm openSUSE project if they went crazy, do you think the name and trademark issue is the biggest problem? To me, it sounds a bit like the famous "If someone gets the password to your system, he can log in and change your desktop theme."

So to me the whole stunt sounds like a vote between:

1. do you want to take an active role in making openSUSE truely independent of SUSE? 2. are you ok with SUSE basically owning the project and you surf along?

Because there is hardly a middle way.

Yes, that would make much more sense to me. Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org