Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (76 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-project] 2019-04-02 board meeting minutes

On sob, Apr 20, 2019 at 8:30 PM, Richard Brown <RBrownCCB@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 20 Apr 2019 at 00:24, Stasiek Michalski <hellcp@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Let's go back in time, far far before all this happened, and explore
the darkest

Let's not - 2011 was not a happy time, 2019 is.

Novell's commitment to openSUSE didn't stop them from signing agreement
Microsoft, which was not well recieved in the community. There are some
decisions which might seem like a good idea from "this will benefit
PoV, but at the same time are "this will hurt other communities about
which we
care". Community after all are not just openSUSE evangelists, they are
which contribute to stuff not only within the project, but also to the
ecosystem of communicating vessels of open source software. I would
like to
understand, because I know it's impossible to go out into community and
about an agreements before they are finalized, openSUSE elects a board,
is there
a policy to talk about such potential topic with them?

There is no formal policy, nor do I think it would be nice if we had one.

SUSE should not need to "seek permission" from openSUSE to conduct
it's business.
Inversely, openSUSE should not need to "seek permission" from SUSE to
conduct it's business.

The status quo that we live in today is that neither SUSE nor openSUSE
has any formal need to inform the other of any new activities.
Obviously, we're partners and we act as such, and so there is an
expectation that if there is any action, on either side, which risks
impacting the other, such talks are had.

eg. SUSE contacting openSUSE to assuage concerns when the EQT deal was
announced (and the HPE deal, and the Micro Focus deal..)
openSUSE did the same when the Project merged Tumbleweed/Factory.
And you can see the coming together of efforts that launched Leap as
both an example of SUSE informing openSUSE, or openSUSE informing
SUSE, depending on your point of view (both are equally valid).

Yes, but majority of SUSE business doesn't (and shouldn't) affect openSUSE
directly, except the obvious, openSUSE relying on SUSE's business performance
with founding events and infrastructure. My worry is that back in the days a lot
of moves, which affected openSUSE Project directly, were done without openSUSE's
best interest (or with projected best interest turning into quite the opposite).
I'm glad we are able to work together, but working together is not the entire
story. It is the consideration of the darkest timeline, not the current timeline.

> But I do not share such positive views regarding all of SUSE's
> products.
> Across significant parts of SUSE's portfolio there is a noticeable
> absence of any effort to foster the same kind of productive
> Community+Company collaboration that we are used to in openSUSE.
> It is my strong personal view that SUSE needs execute better in this
> regard, for its own benefits as much as for assisting the vibrancy and
> general good health of the openSUSE Project.

Studio is calling, it would like its code open :P

Studio is no longer sold commercially by SUSE, with customers directed
towards using the same OBS w. Studio Express we are lucky to have on

I'm doing what I can to get old Studio opened; it requires a lot of
work to clean up the code suitably for release - and it's not easy to
get volunteers for that effort when the pool of people who know the
code is tiny, and understandably they'd rather people know and use
their fresh open code in Studio Express instead of the old stuff.

And while SUSE of course has it's heart in the right place, it's hard
to justify spending actual person-hours on something which has and
will never again have any commercial benefit what-so-ever.

I was joking there, I understand open sourcing code that has been abused for
years won't be easy, and that nobody really cares about it. While Studio Express
in OBS has been improving, it will never be able to be a 1:1 to what Studio was,
because it's, quite rightfully, not the goal of the team.

> Again, I don't want openSUSE to be dependant on such exceptionalism -
> we need the Project to be able to stand on it's own two feet.

Heroes are doing what they can to improve the state, but that's
absolutely true

The Heroes are a few, and exceptionally good at what they do, working
in difficult circumstances.
I said, I don't want openSUSE to be dependant on such exceptional few.

worst of all, they don't have access to some critical stuff, like
forums-o-o, www-o-o, instead relying on Micro Focus to manage that

Indeed, but all the incidents tracked since at least December on involve systems that don't rely on MicroFocus.
I know it's always tempting to point fingers at a more distant, less
communicative, less involved supporter than SUSE who we all work with
closer, but MicroFocus have done a very good job of keeping openSUSE's
lights on. We suffered next to no disruption during the transition of
SUSE's ownership from MF, which really should be considered

That was not my point, I just wanted to point out that even if they wanted to,
Heroes are not capable of doing everything in the openSUSE infra.

Let's rag on openSUSE for a second here. <snip: lots of suggestions>

But why? It encourages to contribute to the software which you can run
on you
favourite distro afterwards :D

No it doesn't - something built in OBS for Fedora or Ubuntu isn't
magically suddenly available for openSUSE. Other distributions have
other standards (I would argue lesser ones), and we shouldn't
compromise openSUSE's quality needlessly.

I mean, that's a fair point, but what if Fedora had an official instance
interconnected with openSUSE instance. New Fedora releases could be available
quicker in our OBS, and vice versa. It would relieve some load off of openSUSE
instance, but would cause more software to pop up for Fedora in their instance.
The structure of OBS is quite literally made to span across a few projects.

Federating software-o-o between a few (interconnected) instances is an idea I
have already tried exploring, and I am still heavily considering adding support
for it.

About openSUSE quality, I would on the other hand argue that applications should
go to /usr directory and not /srv, which should be reserved for user's websites
instead. It's a neat structure, which this packaging (of OBS, Nextcloud etc.)
needlessly complicates. I understand packaging of openQA for other distros was a
pain in the ass, but it shows a good example of possible portability and
usefullness of (open)SUSE solutions in those distros. I feel like the bigger
issue here is that there were trials of making OBS work on other distros, but
were never considered beyond that. It's almost as if people doing that hard work
on porting are afraid of the reaction of OBS team to this kind of submission,
even though it would not hurt openSUSE packaging in any way. There is a huge
__**BUT**__ here though, it would make SLE11 (general support just ended, still
on LTSS support for 3 years) incapable of running OBS due to lack of systemd,
and incompatibility of sysv scripts between SLE and RHEL just makes this harder
to support fully.

But it's impossible to fix the mistakes of the past here...

And keep in mind openSUSE contains a trademark inside of its name, I
wonder how that will go :/

The people involved in the discussions at this early date have started
exploring this issue, and suggestions of some form of legal agreement
between SUSE and whatever-form-openSUSE-takes seem to be a possible
solution to that problem.

Early days yet though - a lot of the details depend on what the
community wants - hence the need to refine the options iteratively.

I'm glad it's being discussed.

LCP [Stasiek]

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

< Previous Next >