On 07/20/2017 10:47 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:

Not complete reinstall, but many updates very often, some of them "dramatic". Components may stop working suddenly, others can change behaviour, computer may not boot... it can be "entertaining" :-)

You'd better be good at figuring out problems.

Then maybe you should switch to a rolling release by people who know how to run a rolling release. I have another machine on Manjaro (arch derivative). Its been rolling for over a year. Rolled through 3 or 4 different kernels, rolled through several plasma5/kde versions. Its had exactly one rough roll, (which did not affect me, but did affect others). A Rolling Release does not have to be a white knuckles ride. -- After all is said and done, more is said than done.

On 07/20/2017 02:36 PM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:05 PM, John Andersen wrote:

...

On 07/20/2017 10:41 AM, Jim Flanagan wrote:

...

Obvious question is, which one?

I run two boxes, one as a server and the other just a desktop.

Why does it got to be just ONE?

Leap for the server. (just keep up with updates occasionally, or when you hear about significant vulnerabilities. After each point release - update to the new version. 42.2--->42.3 No need to re-install. Just do the in-place update. No actual reason to keep day by day updates.

But 42.3 -> 43.0 (aka Leap 15.0) is likely just 18-months away or less. That's a once every several years event for Leap and should have some updates that have been queued up for a couple years. Updates that are likely already in Tumbleweed.

Sure, but so what? What's your point? Is the lack of those updates that are queued up hurting him in any way? How much better will his life be if he updates his server to tumble weed and has to apply rolling updates weekly, sometimes daily? Its his server we are talking about here. Not his workstation. An in place upgrade from one opensuse release to the next is almost always uneventful. Other than a few kernel tweaks and security fixes along the way what else to you need in the server? I go MONTHS without touching my server machines.

If you fear that pain, I'd seriously consider Tumbleweed until Leap 15.0 comes out a year plus from now.

Again, its a server I'm talking about. There's more pain in tumbleweed than in Leap. -- After all is said and done, more is said than done. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 6:48 PM, John Andersen wrote:

On 07/20/2017 02:36 PM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:05 PM, John Andersen wrote:

...

On 07/20/2017 10:41 AM, Jim Flanagan wrote:

...

Obvious question is, which one?

I run two boxes, one as a server and the other just a desktop.

Why does it got to be just ONE?

Leap for the server. (just keep up with updates occasionally, or when you hear about significant vulnerabilities. After each point release - update to the new version. 42.2--->42.3 No need to re-install. Just do the in-place update. No actual reason to keep day by day updates.

But 42.3 -> 43.0 (aka Leap 15.0) is likely just 18-months away or less. That's a once every several years event for Leap and should have some updates that have been queued up for a couple years. Updates that are likely already in Tumbleweed.

Sure, but so what? What's your point?

Is the lack of those updates that are queued up hurting him in any way? How much better will his life be if he updates his server to tumble weed and has to apply rolling updates weekly, sometimes daily?

Its his server we are talking about here. Not his workstation.

An in place upgrade from one opensuse release to the next is almost always uneventful.

Other than a few kernel tweaks and security fixes along the way what else to you need in the server? I go MONTHS without touching my server machines.

I have a server that's been running since roughly Jan 1, 2013, so 4 1/2 years. I put the latest openSUSE on it at that time and about 6 months after each new release I upgrade the server. I can say with confidence that in the pre-Leap days I had upgrades where services quit serving. Maybe it was SFTP, email, or web; I don't really recall the details. Oh yeah, it was all 3: failure to reboot (twice I think). And the server is remote, so I had to fire up remote console access and troubleshoot from 500 miles away. I also recall a couple of updates that caused a background issue that took months to surface. (ie. log rotation stopped and I ended up overflowing my disk space was one. I think there was another.) I've never had Tumbleweed on a server, but if I was gun shy about doing inplace upgrade in pre-Leap days, I'd be just as gun shy about doing it at the end of Leap 42.3's lifetime. That's going to be a major upgrade by definition. So, if it was me doing a "non-business-critical" server from scratch today, I'd go with Tumbleweed for at least the next couple years. That's just my perspective, so I won't argue beyond the above. Good luck regardless which choice is made, Greg -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 2017-07-21 06:19, David C. Rankin wrote:

On 07/20/2017 04:36 PM, Greg Freemyer wrote:

...

If you fear that pain, I'd seriously consider Tumbleweed until Leap 15.0 comes out a year plus from now.

What happened to 14? 13.1 -> 42.2 -> 15 ??

Yes, that's the sequence. 14 is missing in order to use the same big number as SLES does. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)

On 2017-07-21 02:19, Basil Chupin wrote:

I am not subscribed to Factory so don't know if TW is still talked about there but it certainly is not mentioned here -- and TW just simply cannot so perfect that it has no problems which need airing :-).

Yes, there are posts about TW. TW has two main types of problems: a) a problem that arises the same in any distribution, not that specific. b) a problem that is specific to new changes in the software, tools, libraries, maybe in a section that seems to be totally different from the one that shows the symptoms. Thus, a problem really specific to TW development. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)

On 2017-07-21 04:29, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

* Basil Chupin [07-20-17 20:19]: [...]

...

I am still puzzled by the fact that little if nothing is ever said about Tumbleweed in this HELP list.

If I recall correctly, Richard stated some time ago that Tumbleweed is now an official release just like Leap and no longer needs to be 'discussed' in Factory.

I am not subscribed to Factory so don't know if TW is still talked about there but it certainly is not mentioned here -- and TW just simply cannot so perfect that it has no problems which need airing :-).

Tw for the most part is discussed on opensuse-factory, not opensuse.

Not if it is not a question directly related to its development, according to some. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)

* John Andersen [07-20-17 23:10]:

On July 20, 2017 7:29:42 PM PDT, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

* Basil Chupin [07-20-17 20:19]: [...]

...

I am still puzzled by the fact that little if nothing is ever said about Tumbleweed in this HELP list.

If I recall correctly, Richard stated some time ago that Tumbleweed is now an official release just like Leap and no longer needs to be 'discussed' in Factory.

I am not subscribed to Factory so don't know if TW is still talked about there but it certainly is not mentioned here -- and TW just simply cannot so perfect that it has no problems which need airing :-).

Tw for the most part is discussed on opensuse-factory, not opensuse.

We know that Patrick, probably learned it here on this list by seeing people chased away like mangy dogs for having the sand to ask a TW question here.

The question is WHY is this the case if TW is an official release?

because it is closely related to development and to factory. Tw is a stable release but it is also the development platform for the next Leap. -- (paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net Photos: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/piwigo paka @ IRCnet freenode -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

Am 21. Juli 2017 08:20:58 MESZ schrieb Basil Chupin :

...

* John Andersen [07-20-17 23:10]:

...

On July 20, 2017 7:29:42 PM PDT, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

* Basil Chupin [07-20-17 20:19]: [...]

...

I am still puzzled by the fact that little if nothing is ever said about Tumbleweed in this HELP list.

If I recall correctly, Richard stated some time ago that Tumbleweed is now an official release just like Leap and no longer needs to be 'discussed' in Factory.

I am not subscribed to Factory so don't know if TW is still talked about there but it certainly is not mentioned here -- and TW just simply cannot so perfect that it has no problems which need airing :-). Tw for the most part is discussed on opensuse-factory, not opensuse.

We know that Patrick, probably learned it here on this list by seeing people chased away like mangy dogs for having the sand to ask a TW question here.

The question is WHY is this the case if TW is an official release? because it is closely related to development and to factory. Tw is a stable release but it is also the development platform for

On 21/07/17 13:15, Patrick Shanahan wrote: the

...

next Leap.

If that is the case then surely it should be called Leap xx.Alpha1 or Leap xx.Alpha2 but not Tumbleweed?

No, he correctly stated "*also* the development platform". TW does not necessarily receive less testing per se but because there are more version changes per time problems related to that are more likely -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 21 July 2017 at 08:50, Basil Chupin wrote:

By "he correctly stated" I assume you mean Patrick and not Richard.

OK: it's a "development platform" which, by defintion, really means a glorified beta for the next version of openSUSE. I can't argue against that.

I can argue against the 'glorified beta' tag, and I will. But I will do so by better explaining what really goes on. For starters, I will explain for whom (for which users) Tumbleweed is developed for. As a rolling release, Tumbleweed is developed for users who desire the latest upstream packages as soon as they're 'ready'. 'ready' is a defined in collaboration between upstreams (we typically choose upstream stable versions), our maintainers (we trust their judgement when they say something is stable or not) and automated QA (we don't ship stuff we know to be broken). The above definition of Tumbleweed users does often include, a subset of that targetted user base, lots of openSUSE's developers. But Tumbleweed is not a glorified beta, nor (directly) a development platform for 'future openSUSE releases' (especially if you mean openSUSE Leap releases - people should be specific considering Tumbleweed and Leap are two different distributions which we both support equally and have their own release models) openSUSE Leap minor releases (eg. 42.3) consist of effectively 3 'tranches' of packages (this is a simplification for the benefit of this discussion, Release Managers can go into more detail if desired). Tranche 1 = The Base System = Is provided by SUSE Linux Enterprise. Tumbleweed plays no direct part in the Development of Tranche 1. We take the sources from SLE, and use them in openSUSE Leap. Tranche 2 = Previous Leap Minor Releases = In each Leap minor release a significant number of packages are inherited from the previous minor releases with no modifications. Tumbleweed plays no part in the Development of Tranche 2 Tranche 3 = Tumbleweed. About 1/3rd of 42.3 includes packages which are effectively backported from Tumbleweed. This is done on an ad-hoc basis driven by our contributors. These backports need testing separately from what is done with Tumbleweed, so while I can see where people come from when they say Tumbleweed is the 'development platform' for Leap, in reality it's more of a case of Leap doing additional work to reap benefits from that which is being done in Tumbleweed. Key point - For Leap MINOR releases, there is no direct pipeline where people can think something in Tumbleweed will end up in a Leap minor release. Tumbleweed is not the development platform in those cases, but the Leap rolling development builds (which have replaced Leaps Alphas/Betas) take that role. For openSUSE Leap MAJOR releases (eg. the upcoming 15) it is a different story, but that story still doesn't fit the narrative that Tumbleweed is a "glorified beta" for openSUSE openSUSE Leap 15 will be based on SLE 15, providing the equivalent of "Tranche 1" in the above example. SLE 15 will be based on a Tumbleweed snapshot that will probably be at least 6 months 'out of date' before it is released. Nothing SUSE will use in SLE 15 will get there without being part of Tumbleweed first. "Tranche 2" will not exist because there are no minor releases from which to base on. It will come back in 15.1 and later. "Tranche 3" will still exist, and will probably equate to about 2/3rds of Leap 15. So, if you wanted to simply describe the situation, you could say that in addition to being a standalone, reliable rolling release, Tumbleweed does double as the development platform for SLE. You could just as equally say that in addition to being an enterprise regular release, SLE doubles as the development platform for Leap. Therefore if you want to throw the term 'glorified beta' into the mix, it gets a little bit weird.. if Tumbleweed is a 'glorified beta' for SLE, then SLE is a 'glorified beta' for Leap. And that is a rather amusing, if wholly inaccurate, extrapolation of the situation. It's much better to accept the 3 distributions in the openSUSE/SLE extended family on their own merits and avoid attaching emotive labels to the relationships between them. Tumbleweed is for people who want stability with rapid change reflecting what's going on in the FOSS word. SLE is for enterprise users who want absolute reliability, a slower pace of change, and a smaller package set in their Linux OS. Leap is for people in between, wanting reliability with a slower pace of change but also with a larger package set in their Linux OS. None are 'glorified betas' of each other, and we work collaboratively across all of them to share as much code & good practice to benefit all 3 distributions. Tumbleweed benefits SLE and Leap, SLE benefits Tumbleweed & Leap, Leap benefits Tumbleweed & SLE. All pretty equally. Hope this clears that up. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 21 July 2017 at 10:15, John Andersen wrote:

On 07/21/2017 12:23 AM, Richard Brown wrote:

...

Hope this clears that up.

Ah, No. Lessee here.....SLE begat Leap, which begat Tumbleweed, but then in some incestuous mother and child reunion the next SLE will spring fully developed from the loins of some tumbelweed snapshot. And I'm my own Grandpa.

My head hurts, so going to bed now.

When I wake up tomorrow, I'd be curious to know why the numbering system is returning to the teens, and what happened to they guy that convinced opensuse to jump from 13 to 42?

Is he looking for work some place?

The person that first suggested 42 is happily employed by SUSE Linux GmbH and is currently the Chairman of the openSUSE Project. He's spending his work time answering emails about whether or not he got fired for a decision that ultimately was decided upon by the whole openSUSE Board, a body of individuals elected by the community to make such decisions, many of whom are still serving in the Board today. 42 might not have been my brightest idea, but it was less of a waste of time than writing this email :) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 21 July 2017 at 10:16, David C. Rankin wrote:

On 07/21/2017 02:23 AM, Richard Brown wrote:

...

As a rolling release, Tumbleweed is developed for users who desire the latest upstream packages as soon as they're 'ready'. 'ready' is a defined in collaboration between upstreams (we typically choose upstream stable versions)

Here is where the unease comes in that may lend itself to the glorified beta moniker.

There needs to be clear definition on what the "latest upstream package" is. For Arch, that definition is crystal clear. "The latest upstream official 'Release' - period. Not a kinda/sorta "we talked with them about it and we think the beta they are working on is stable enough" stuff.

"Current with the latest upstream official release."

That is a philosophy that is hard to poke hole in for a rolling release to follow.

There is no reason future releases, not yet official, cannot be included in testing, but for roll out to TW, it would serve it well to stick to the latest upstream official release. Until upstream has the confidence in its own package out as an official release, it's hard to make an argument that it is good to pull something without that level of confidence into a production rolling release.

Just my .02...

The Arch philosophy does have one hole - there is no common standards from all those upstreams. What they stay is stable might not be stable. What they say is unstable, might be stable. For the interpretation of stability, we trust out maintainers to be able to make sensible judgement calls on the reality of their respective upstreams. Some of our maintainers occasionally go faster than their upstreams. Some go slower. Either way, openQA has proven itself to be sufficient to cover the fallout of those decisions in the vast majority of those cases, and I would argue that our maintainers are proven wrong no more often (and probably less often) than blindly trusting upstreams declarations of stability. The Arch way has it's flaws, and in order to correct them requires the blind reliance on upstreams to improve. Our way has it's flaws, but they are flaws which we are better positions to correct ourselves. I prefer that, personally. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 07/21/2017 03:25 AM, Richard Brown wrote:

The Arch philosophy does have one hole - there is no common standards from all those upstreams. What they stay is stable might not be stable. What they say is unstable, might be stable.

Yes, granted, but a distro can only control what is under its control. Neither OpenSuSE or Arch have any control over what upstream does (to our repeated chagrin on a number of occasions). A policy that says "our policy is whatever the maintainers decide -- we trust them" isn't actually a policy, it is just whatever the maintainers decide on an ad hoc basis. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying this can't work or work well, I saying from a distro standpoint it does not provide any clarity on what user can expect. Users cannot expect a TW made up of released packages if the maintainers, in their discretion, can provide upstream betas instead. What is the old Demming philosophy of TQM (total quality management) -- "if you can't measure it, you can't manage it." Whatever the maintainers decide is a difficult ruler to measure against. -- David C. Rankin, J.D.,P.E. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 2017-07-21 08:20, Basil Chupin wrote:

On 21/07/17 13:15, Patrick Shanahan wrote:

...

* John Andersen <> [07-20-17 23:10]:

...

On July 20, 2017 7:29:42 PM PDT, Patrick Shanahan <> wrote:

...

* Basil Chupin <> [07-20-17 20:19]:

...

...

...

Tw for the most part is discussed on opensuse-factory, not opensuse.

We know that Patrick, probably learned it here on this list by seeing people chased away like mangy dogs for having the sand to ask a TW question here.

Incorrectly, because this list is also officially intended for TW questions. Only questions related to development should go to the factory mail list. User questions should go here for all releases. That's, I believe, the official view.

...

...

The question is WHY is this the case if TW is an official release? because it is closely related to development and to factory. Tw is a stable release but it is also the development platform for the next Leap.

If that is the case then surely it should be called Leap xx.Alpha1 or Leap xx.Alpha2 but not Tumbleweed? Nor should it have been given the imprimatur of being an official release.

And if, as you claim, that TW is a test bed for the next release of Leap<whateveritiscalled> then the advice given to the OP was totally inappropriate and he should have been told to stay away from TW.

TW is not the test bed for Leap. At least, not quite. 1) TW is a release on its own. 2) TW acts also as the test bed for SLES. 3) Leap takes the core packages from SLES, thus indirectly from TW. Currently on 42.3 there are packages that have years of delay compared to TW (example: shotwell). 4) Leap takes the rest (2/3) directly from TW. Example: KDE. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)

On 7/20/17 1:05 PM, John Andersen wrote:

On 07/20/2017 10:41 AM, Jim Flanagan wrote:

...

Obvious question is, which one?

I run two boxes, one as a server and the other just a desktop.

Why does it got to be just ONE?

Leap for the server. (just keep up with updates occasionally, or when you hear about significant vulnerabilities. After each point release - update to the new version. 42.2--->42.3 No need to re-install. Just do the in-place update. No actual reason to keep day by day updates.

Tumbleweed for the workstation. Its rolling, and you probably want to keep up with all updates.

You said yourself this is mostly hobby and learning. So you learn two systems with common tools. Easy Peasy.

(I've got a server in the office still running Opensuse 10.2. Its not accessable from the outside world. I have backup server that is running ubuntu off site. I'm playing with Manjaro on another smaller machine. Why'z it gotsta be just one?

Thanks everyone for the good feedback. Much appreciated. I do think I'll try both, most likely Leap for the server (but I do have my music on my workstation, don't want that to go down. I could move it to the server tho). What the heck, I'll give Tumbleweed a try on the workstation. Carry on! Jim F -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org

On 2017-07-20 21:34, Knurpht - Gertjan Lettink wrote:

Op donderdag 20 juli 2017 19:41:58 CEST schreef Jim Flanagan:

...

Leap for the server. Just get all the services that it's supposed to be serving. Then again, my own (cloud)server runs TW, and has been doing so for ~18 months. Both Leap and TW are QA tested, nothing gets released out in the open that fails those tests.

But Leap has on top been tested by humans for months before release. Some times TW is released with known (and published) problems with this or that component. It is work in progress. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)

On 2017-07-21 02:37, Greg Freemyer wrote:

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 8:14 PM, Carlos E. R. <> wrote:

...

Some times TW is released with known (and published) problems with this or that component. It is work in progress.

Is there an example of that in the last couple years?

I can't think of any. Tumbleweed is much more stable than you make it sound.

:-) Some quick examples: A major change to LDAP the other day. A very major upgrade to Perl coming. php5 drop. Python changes to version 3. gcc7. LO changing the font engine so that some fonts no longer are accepted. elevator=bfq not accepted. MonoDevelop disappears. Missing jssc in Arduino. TW thinking that a stick that was formatted as FAT is still an ISO. Leafnode not starting. Missing deps for duplicity. Base:System broken for PowerPC. NM failing after TW 20170630. /var/lock gone in some cases. ecryptfs broken.

Right now it hasn't been published in a week and one of the main reasons is it won't pass autoQA tests related to Ruby 2.2 functionality.

Back when it was called "factory" that failure would have got out to the community, but with Tumbleweed we have a large set of autoQA tests that have to pass. And when a major bug does get past autoQA, autoQA is updated to look for it the next time.

I'm not saying it's perfect, but it's pretty damn good,

Yes, it is very good. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)