Liam Proven <lproven@suse.com> wrote:

...

--------------------------- SUSE

This is the one I apparently got wrong.

My impression was as follows:

[snip]

...

SLE, the enterprise distro. Slow release cycle, stable, supported, costs money -- traditional software licensing model, comparable to but not identical to RH's support-subscription model.

AFAIK, SLES is still available free of charge. Support is for-a-fee. In the past, I am certain I have downloaded SLES to check it out. In my business, I have just never been convinced of the business case in the per-cpu or per-machine support fees. I have often been tempted to try it out though.

...

I assumed that SUSE sponsors openSUSE development the same way that RH sponsors Fedora -- it (until very recently, at least) is mostly developed by SUSE staff and is the testbed for future releases of SLE.

I don't see how it can be any other way. if openSUSE does not serve a business purpose, what are we here for?

...

But now I have been told, strongly, that this is not correct.

That openSUSE is far more independent of SUSE than Fedora is of RH. That in some ways it's almost a rival or an officially-sanctioned fork.

So what _is_ relationship of SUSE to openSUSE?

Does SUSE sponsor openSUSE?

Most definitely. The steady stream of patches flowing into Leap has made it very much a rolling distro. Those are virtually all coming from SLES, (much?) less so from openSUSE contributors. Bugreports on topics that violate SUSE's SLES support commitments are often given more attention than others. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (-1.4°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org