Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-project (325 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-project] Project name and logo discussion
On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 18:32, Ronan Chagas <ronisbr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Do you think openSUSE should change it's name?


IMHO, definitely not… now.

It takes time to build a brand, and openSUSE is a very good one. The points in
favor that I read on this thread, again IMHO, do not seem to justify the cons.

I remember when Leap 15.0 was proposed. The very controversial numbering
system
(from 42.3 to 15.0) was proposed to keep openSUSE in line with SLE. Now, one
year later, there is a discussion to change the name which will completely
break
this “alignment”. Everything will be very confusing (again) to the users who
are
not reading this thread.

My suggestion: give the Foundation another name (Gecko foundation, Lizard
foundation, Green foundation, whatever…), keep the openSUSE name for the
distribution, and change the logo if necessary.

When we reach a point that the points in favor of name changing are clearly
more
interesting than the cons, then just drop openSUSE in favor of Tumbleweed and
Leap.

Best regards,

Ronan Arraes

Consider the following with your proposal

- The main point of forming the Foundation is to ease fundraising,
sponsorship, etc for the openSUSE Project. Having a Foundation under a
name different than that of our primary output will hinder that
problem - just like it does for "The Document Foundation" who have to
compete for attention with other significant sponsors of Libreoffice
despite the fact the TDF is _the_ primary community organisation
behind Libreoffice. It seems to me that we should do everything we can
to avoid the name of the Foundation being any different than the name
of the rest of the Project.

- If we continue using the name openSUSE in any way, manner, or form,
SUSE will be duty bound to ensure that openSUSE does not conduct any
actions which hurts its brand or trademark. This will mean that,
alongside any agreement the Project has to use the name "openSUSE",
there will be strings attached. Such restrictions could be in the form
of the status quo - currently SUSE have a veto right over any actions
in the openSUSE community, a power trusted into it's Chairman, me.
This is a right I am on the record of being uncomfortable with, and
thankfully have never needed to use, but I totally understand the need
of it from a corporate perspective - openSUSE can't be allowed to go
making deals that undermines SUSE's business, gives it a bad name in
public, or otherwise makes things more complicated for either
organisation. SUSE's Veto right also means that we have been able to
forgo having long detailed lists of restrictions on what openSUSE can
do. However, if SUSEs veto right is lost in the Project's transition
to a Foundation (and that might be necessary to ensure the Foundation
is seen as a clearly separate legal entity), I would expect SUSE will
require a significant amount of detailed restrictions on the
activities the Foundation will be able to conduct. Negotiating and
finding a mutually satisfactory set of terms and conditions will take
a lot of time and effort, and such restrictions will limit the scope
and extent of the Foundation to receive sponsorships, money, services,
etc.

Both of the above points might be satisfactory to the community, but
it should be realised that consequences of this decision will shape
the nature and ability of the Foundation to operate once its
established. I think we should do our best to avoid looking at this
topic emotionally and instead choose which option is practically, on
balance, best for the Project in the long term.

Despite my repeated point-making on this thread, I actually have no
strong preference either way..but I do wish to ensure that the
community makes an informed choice.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
This Thread