30 Jun
2010
30 Jun
'10
11:11 a.m.
== Statement ==
We deliver a well-balanced platform that equally appeals to end users,
power users, developers and server administrators. (Other fields we
currently do?)
== Activities ==
=== Will do... ===
* Do as we always did
* Good compromise between actuality and stability
* Agreeable release cycle between 8 and 12 months
* Support for the 3 most current releases
* Continue the naturally growth of openSUSE:Factory
by incorporating contributors' submissions
* For end users
* Deliver both KDE and GNOME desktops
(with a focus on KDE. By laws of physics we are required to
provide an antipole to the otherwise GNOME-ridden world ;-)
* Covering a multitude of areas of interest
(publishing:/latex, OOo, graphics:/gimp, inkscape, etc.)
* For developers
* C, C++, Perl, Python, Java and the usual satellite libraries
(boost, libwhatdoIknow, maven, ...)
* For power users and sysadmins
* Agreeable command line experience (I can quantify that if desired..)
* Xen VM
* Networking Services (dns,http,etc etc etc)
=== Try to... ===
* Deliver a third, more minimalistic desktop environment
* Speed it up (doesn't everybody? :-)
* minimal system (we're ok I'd say)
* blubb.
* Do The Right Thing™ rather than just doing what the loudest voice
says - i.e. critical analysis towards hyped items
=== Will... ===
* not solely focus on a narrow band topic only
* not necessarily do something just because Ubuntu does it
Readers: Whatever we do currently, add it.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
30 Jun
30 Jun
12:17 p.m.
* Jan Engelhardt <jengelh(a)medozas.de> [2010-06-30 17:11]:
== Statement ==
We deliver a well-balanced platform that equally appeals to end users,
power users, developers and server administrators. (Other fields we
currently do?)
== Activities ==
=== Will do... ===
* Do as we always did
* Good compromise between actuality and stability
* Agreeable release cycle between 8 and 12 months
* Support for the 3 most current releases
* Continue the naturally growth of openSUSE:Factory
by incorporating contributors' submissions
* provide a low entry-barrier for potential contributors (through
the OBS it is probably easier to make contributions than any
other Linux distro)
* For end users
* Deliver both KDE and GNOME desktops
(with a focus on KDE. By laws of physics we are required to
provide an antipole to the otherwise GNOME-ridden world ;-)
* Covering a multitude of areas of interest
(publishing:/latex, OOo, graphics:/gimp, inkscape, etc.)
* For developers
* C, C++, Perl, Python, Java and the usual satellite libraries
(boost, libwhatdoIknow, maven, ...)
* For power users and sysadmins
* Agreeable command line experience (I can quantify that if desired..)
* Xen VM
* Networking Services (dns,http,etc etc etc)
* easy creation of specialized derivatives and applicances
(through Studio)
=== Try to... ===
* Deliver a third, more minimalistic desktop environment
* Speed it up (doesn't everybody? :-)
* minimal system (we're ok I'd say)
* blubb.
We already do with the LXDE desktop which will make its debut
with the 11.3 release :)
* Do The Right Thing™ rather than just doing what the loudest voice
says - i.e. critical analysis towards hyped items
* Better marketing, in particular communicating our existing strengths
and unique features (i.e. competitive advantages)
=== Will... ===
* not solely focus on a narrow band topic only
* not necessarily do something just because Ubuntu does it
+10 for this proposal.
You should put in on the wiki.
--
Guido Berhoerster
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
12:56 p.m.
On Wednesday June 30 2010 18:17:28 Guido Berhoerster wrote:
Heh, before the flame war starts once again stick with the "all desktop are
considered equal" maxim ;D (I use only KDE myself but I think that openSUSE
does a pretty good job in having the different alternatives polished and is
one of the few distros that can claim this so this shouldn't get changed)
/signed
Merge this together with Martins "poweruser" proposal and the developer one
and we have the best IMHO.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
* Jan Engelhardt <jengelh(a)medozas.de>
[2010-06-30 17:11]:
> == Statement ==
>
> We deliver a well-balanced platform that equally appeals to end users,
> power users, developers and server administrators. (Other fields we
> currently do?)
>
> == Activities ==
>
> === Will do... ===
>
> * Do as we always did
>
> * Good compromise between actuality and stability
> * Agreeable release cycle between 8 and 12 months
> * Support for the 3 most current releases
I certainly would love this - even if it is just some core for servers that
gets longer support. Another alternative would be to make some LTS once in a
while.
* Continue the
naturally growth of openSUSE:Factory
by incorporating contributors' submissions
* provide a low entry-barrier for potential contributors (through
the OBS it is probably easier to make contributions than any
other Linux distro)
> * For end users
>
> * Deliver both KDE and GNOME desktops
>
> (with a focus on KDE. By laws of physics we are required to
> provide an antipole to the otherwise GNOME-ridden world ;-) * Covering a
multitude of areas of interest
(publishing:/latex, OOo, graphics:/gimp, inkscape, etc.)
* For developers
* C, C++, Perl, Python, Java and the usual satellite libraries
(boost, libwhatdoIknow, maven, ...)
* For power users and sysadmins
* Agreeable command line experience (I can quantify that if desired..)
* Xen VM
* Networking Services (dns,http,etc etc etc)
* easy creation of specialized derivatives and applicances
(through Studio)
=== Try to... ===
* Deliver a third, more minimalistic desktop environment
* Speed it up (doesn't everybody? :-)
* minimal system (we're ok I'd say)
* blubb.
We already do with the LXDE desktop which will make its debut
with the 11.3 release :)
* Do The Right Thing™ rather than just doing what
the loudest voice
says - i.e. critical analysis towards hyped items
* Better marketing, in particular communicating our existing strengths
and unique features (i.e. competitive advantages)
=== Will... ===
* not solely focus on a narrow band topic only
* not necessarily do something just because Ubuntu does it
+10 for this proposal.
You should put in on the wiki.
1:30 p.m.
On Wednesday 2010-06-30 18:56, Stephan Kleine wrote:
My point exactly: We have to push KDE, to make the situation equal. :)
(Rationale: GNOME has more exposure due to being in Fedora and Bountu.)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
> *
Deliver both KDE and GNOME desktops
>
> (with a focus on KDE. By laws of physics we are required to
> provide an antipole to the otherwise GNOME-ridden world)
Heh, before the flame war starts once again stick with the "all desktop are
considered equal" maxim ;D 
6:24 p.m.
Le mercredi 30 juin 2010, à 19:30 +0200, Jan Engelhardt a écrit :
On Wednesday 2010-06-30 18:56, Stephan Kleine wrote:
My point exactly: We have to push KDE, to make the situation equal. :)
(Rationale: GNOME has more exposure due to being in Fedora and Bountu.)
Let's try to not open this topic again. Last time was not fun, really.
Vincent
--
Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
> *
Deliver both KDE and GNOME desktops
>
> (with a focus on KDE. By laws of physics we are required to
> provide an antipole to the otherwise GNOME-ridden world)
Heh, before the flame war starts once again stick with the "all desktop are
considered equal" maxim ;D 
6:32 p.m.
Am Donnerstag, 1. Juli 2010, 00:24:38 schrieb Vincent Untz:
Le mercredi 30 juin 2010, à 19:30 +0200, Jan
Engelhardt a écrit :
As a KDE user and fan I agree, having choice is good, it's a strength and we
should not wash it down, a point was made with the default switch, no one can
say kde has no proper distribution that is determined to deliver the best kde
experience, no need to alienate the other great desktop environments out
there.
Also having this delve down into kde-gnome talk will not strengthen Jans
proposition but just spindle out of control again.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
On Wednesday 2010-06-30 18:56, Stephan Kleine
wrote:
My point exactly: We have to push KDE, to make the situation equal. :)
(Rationale: GNOME has more exposure due to being in Fedora and Bountu.)
Let's try to not open this topic again. Last time was not fun, really.
Vincent > *
Deliver both KDE and GNOME desktops
>
> (with a focus on KDE. By laws of physics we are required to
> provide an antipole to the otherwise GNOME-ridden world)
Heh, before the flame war starts once again stick with the "all desktop
are considered equal" maxim ;D 
8 Jul
8 Jul
4:55 a.m.
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 18:56:08 Stephan Kleine wrote:
[...]
Merge this together with Martins "poweruser" proposal and the developer
one and we have the best IMHO.
I've tried some merging with Martin's "poweruser" and Jan has updated
the
proposal:
http://en.opensuse.org/Documents/Strategy/Status_quo
We have never documented the Status Quo yet, so I think it's worth while to
document that.
I'd ask everybody to review the page and send comments - not where you want to
go but where are we today. Is that what we've written a good description of
the status quo? What is missing from the status quo? What's wrong?
One thing that was in Martin's proposal under "We will not do anymore":
* Supporting old hardware and non-mainstream architectures
* Supporting form-factors that are not workstation, laptop, server
or netbook
What is the best way to describe the current situation regarding form-factory
and architectures?
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj(a){novell.com,opensuse.org}
Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
5:48 a.m.
* Andreas Jaeger <aj(a)novell.com> [2010-07-08 10:55]:
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 18:56:08 Stephan Kleine
wrote:
This was not intended as a _documentation_ of the status quo.
Although it does that as well, it primarily constitutes a
_proposal for a strategy_ which aims to focus on and stick to
existing strengths of the project while addressing some
deficiencies. In fact it incorporates parts of the other
proposals and should stand adjacent to them as an equal
alternative.
--
Guido Berhoerster
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
[...]
Merge this together with Martins "poweruser" proposal and the developer
one and we have the best IMHO.
I've tried some merging with Martin's "poweruser" and Jan has updated
the
proposal:
http://en.opensuse.org/Documents/Strategy/Status_quo
We have never documented the Status Quo yet, so I think it's worth while to
document that.
6:23 a.m.
On Thursday 08 July 2010 11:48:53 Guido Berhoerster wrote:
* Andreas Jaeger <aj(a)novell.com> [2010-07-08
10:55]:
My goal was to create a documentation of the status quo - I would have added a
third page but Jan merged it in his proposal, so let's go from there.
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 18:56:08 Stephan Kleine
wrote:
This was not intended as a _documentation_ of the status quo. [...]
Merge this together with Martins "poweruser" proposal and the developer
one and we have the best IMHO.
I've tried some merging with Martin's "poweruser" and Jan has updated
the
proposal:
http://en.opensuse.org/Documents/Strategy/Status_quo
We have never documented the Status Quo yet, so I think it's worth while
to document that. Although it does that as well, it primarily
constitutes a
_proposal for a strategy_ which aims to focus on and stick to
Guido, Jan calls it "Status quo" with a purpose.
existing strengths of the project while addressing
some
deficiencies. In fact it incorporates parts of the other
proposals and should stand adjacent to them as an equal
alternative.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj(a){novell.com,opensuse.org}
Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
6:56 a.m.
* Andreas Jaeger <aj(a)novell.com> [2010-07-08 12:23]:
On Thursday 08 July 2010 11:48:53 Guido Berhoerster
wrote:
It is called "Status Quo, and quantified so" and it is a proposal
oritented towards the status quo, if you will, but it also
contains additional elements. Anyway, it is a strategy proposal
(as was Martins and even you call it so yourself above) and I'd
like to be able to vote for it.
--
Guido Berhoerster
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
* Andreas Jaeger <aj(a)novell.com>
[2010-07-08 10:55]:
My goal was to create a documentation of the status quo - I would have added a
third page but Jan merged it in his proposal, so let's go from there.
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 18:56:08 Stephan Kleine
wrote:
This was not intended as a _documentation_ of the status quo. [...]
Merge this together with Martins "poweruser" proposal and the developer
one and we have the best IMHO.
I've tried some merging with Martin's "poweruser" and Jan has updated
the
proposal:
http://en.opensuse.org/Documents/Strategy/Status_quo
We have never documented the Status Quo yet, so I think it's worth while
to document that. Although it does that as well, it primarily
constitutes a
_proposal for a strategy_ which aims to focus on and stick to
Guido, Jan calls it "Status quo" with a purpose.
> existing strengths of the project while addressing some
> deficiencies. In fact it incorporates parts of the other
> proposals and should stand adjacent to them as an equal
> alternative. 
6:11 a.m.
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
One thing that was in Martin's proposal under
"We will not do
anymore":
* Supporting old hardware and non-mainstream architectures
* Supporting form-factors that are not workstation, laptop, server
or netbook
What is the best way to describe the current situation regarding
form-factory and architectures?
I'm not sure we need to state "what we will not do any more". When it
comes to hardware, it's better to state "what we will do":
What we will do:
* endeavour to support primary form-factors: workstation, laptop, server
and netbook.
* endeavour to support current hardware and mainstream architectures.
I understand this definition of "current hardware" is as fuzzy as "old
hardware", but I doubt if anyone will be able to come up with an exact
definition.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (23.1°C)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
7:02 a.m.
On Thursday 08 July 2010 12:11:16 Per Jessen wrote:
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
mainstream architectures are x86 and x86-64. How do we describe the current
status of support for Arm, PowerPC, Sparc etc?
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj(a){novell.com,opensuse.org}
Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
One thing that was in Martin's proposal under
"We will not do
anymore":
* Supporting old hardware and non-mainstream architectures
* Supporting form-factors that are not workstation, laptop, server
or netbook
What is the best way to describe the current situation regarding
form-factory and architectures?
I'm not sure we need to state "what we will not do any more". When it
comes to hardware, it's better to state "what we will do":
What we will do:
* endeavour to support primary form-factors: workstation, laptop, server
and netbook.
* endeavour to support current hardware and mainstream architectures.
I understand this definition of "current hardware" is as fuzzy as "old
hardware", but I doubt if anyone will be able to come up with an exact
definition.
8:05 a.m.
On Thursday 2010-07-08 13:02, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Thursday 08 July 2010 12:11:16 Per Jessen wrote:
"Still in development".
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
mainstream architectures are x86 and x86-64. How do we describe the current
status of support for Arm, PowerPC, Sparc etc? One thing that was in Martin's proposal under
"We will not do
anymore":
* Supporting old hardware and non-mainstream architectures
* Supporting form-factors that are not workstation, laptop, server
or netbook
What is the best way to describe the current situation regarding
form-factory and architectures?
I'm not sure we need to state "what we will not do any more". When it
comes to hardware, it's better to state "what we will do":
What we will do:
* endeavour to support primary form-factors: workstation, laptop, server
and netbook.
* endeavour to support current hardware and mainstream architectures.
I understand this definition of "current hardware" is as fuzzy as "old
hardware", but I doubt if anyone will be able to come up with an exact
definition.
8:15 a.m.
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
On Thursday 08 July 2010 12:11:16 Per Jessen wrote:
Non-existent?
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (25.6°C)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
mainstream architectures are x86 and x86-64. How do we describe the
current status of support for Arm, PowerPC, Sparc etc? One thing that was in Martin's proposal under
"We will not do
anymore":
* Supporting old hardware and non-mainstream architectures
* Supporting form-factors that are not workstation, laptop, server
or netbook
What is the best way to describe the current situation regarding
form-factory and architectures?
I'm not sure we need to state "what we will not do any more". When
it comes to hardware, it's better to state "what we will do":
What we will do:
* endeavour to support primary form-factors: workstation, laptop,
server and netbook.
* endeavour to support current hardware and mainstream architectures.
I understand this definition of "current hardware" is as fuzzy as
"old hardware", but I doubt if anyone will be able to come up with an
exact definition.
11:01 a.m.
On Thursday 2010-07-08 14:15, Per Jessen wrote:
Non-existent?
I wouldn't be _that_ nihilistic :-)
http://download.ares.medozas.de/Black_Ares%3a/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
What we will do:
* endeavour to support primary form-factors: workstation, laptop,
server and netbook.
* endeavour to support current hardware and mainstream architectures.
I understand this definition of "current hardware" is as fuzzy as
"old hardware", but I doubt if anyone will be able to come up with an
exact definition.
mainstream architectures are x86 and x86-64. How do we describe the
current status of support for Arm, PowerPC, Sparc etc?
11:16 a.m.
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Thursday 2010-07-08 14:15, Per Jessen wrote:
Non-existent?
I wouldn't be _that_ nihilistic :-)
http://download.ares.medozas.de/Black_Ares%3a/
Interesting, I haven't looked for sparc stuff for a long time.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (29.4°C)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-project+help(a)opensuse.org
What we will do:
* endeavour to support primary form-factors: workstation, laptop,
server and netbook.
* endeavour to support current hardware and mainstream
architectures.
I understand this definition of "current hardware" is as fuzzy as
"old hardware", but I doubt if anyone will be able to come up with
an exact definition.
mainstream architectures are x86 and x86-64. How do we describe the
current status of support for Arm, PowerPC, Sparc etc?
1 Jul
1 Jul
4:08 a.m.
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 18:17:28 Guido Berhoerster wrote:
[...]
You should put in on the wiki.
Jan put it up and I linked it from:
http://en.opensuse.org/Documents/Strategy
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj(a){novell.com,opensuse.org}
Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
8 Jul
8 Jul
4:58 a.m.
On Wednesday 30 June 2010 17:11:17 Jan Engelhardt wrote:
# Do as we always did! That is,
* good compromise between actuality and stability
* agreeable release cycle between 8 and 12 months
* support for the 3 most current releases
The statement currently includes the above. This is not correct anymore: We
have a fixed 8 month cycle and we support the most current 2 releases - with
an overlap of two months for the third one (2 releases plus two months = 18
months).
I think the last two lines could be removed completely and the good compromise
is mentioned elsewhere in the document.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger, Program Manager openSUSE, aj(a){novell.com,opensuse.org}
Twitter: jaegerandi | Identica: jaegerandi
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Markus Rex, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
3849
days inactive
3857
days old
17 comments
7 participants
participants (7)
-
Andreas Jaeger -
Guido Berhoerster -
Jan Engelhardt -
Karsten König -
Per Jessen -
Stephan Kleine -
Vincent Untz