Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (435 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] [RFC] OpenSUSE Distribution Tiers Policy
  • From: Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 12:02:27 -0400
  • Message-id: <CAEg-Je-f8pH_sJSxXF9BiaiOom=vqubidBNozRsdCLAfuWnXZw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 11:59 AM Gerald Pfeifer <gp@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Wed 2020-06-17, Dirk Müller wrote:
I would like to get your input and start a discussion around :

https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:OpenSUSE_Distribution_Tiers_Policy

Thank you for kicking this off, Dirk!

This is a good initiative, and important to clarify and be open
and transparent, and I like the document you prepared.

For the interest of tracking, please refrain from editing the main
page, and use either the mailing list discussion here or the Talk
page for comments/questions/considerations/feedback.

A small change I'd suggest is to avoid the use of the phrase
"premium tier".

And make the "As of 2020" more specific, unless definitely nobody
plans to propose any changes in the next 26 weeks. ;-)

From a messaging perspective, I recommend not to call the other
ports "unofficial ports". They are officially part of openSUSE,
I'd argue, just not Tier 1. (It's a bit like calling an assistant
doctor and unofficial doctor. ;-)


I think it would be helpful to describe the distribution of
responsibilities between individual package maintainers and the
architecture teams. That is a note or two in the specific items
of the policy, so more an overarching sentence along the lines of
the following (which very raw and rought strawman only) as a
preamble:

Individual package maintainers will strive to package things
such that they build on all platforms they can reasonable
support. The general working of an architecture (booting,
kernel, toolchain,...) and architecture-specific build
failures and bugs primarily resides with the architecture
maintainers.

Hope this makes sense?


I think we should just straight up drop this idea of tiering. Is there
a good reason we can't just go with primary and secondary
architectures as other distros (Debian, Fedora, etc.) do?

We can use "main" and "alternative" if "primary" and "secondary" make
people uncomfortable. But tiering is a term I don't want to see
invoked here, as it involves quality separation, which is not what
this should be about.




--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
References