1.) Statement:
We are a diverse active and inviting community delivering the best
foundation for Linux derivatives by providing a high quality,
long-term supported core distribution, with tools and infrastructure
to easily build on top of it. We encourage projects and developers to
create additional building blocks and specialized spin-offs and
provide a platform to make them visible and appreciated.
The center of this strategy is a high quality and long-term supported
core distribution surrounded by tools to build derivatives which
includes remote system administration. Behind that we will have
a marketing team spreading the word about our Project and the
derivatives made with it. Additionally, we will provide derivatives
for desktops, server usage, software and web development. To be
successful we see the collaboration with upstream and other Linux
distributions as a key factor in providing quality derivatives.
2.) Key ideas:
* reduce the number of packages in Factory
- provide smaller, stable, high quality core distro
- provide Long Term Support (LTS) for this reduced set
- core suitable for servers
- available for more platforms (including ARM, PowerPC, etc.)
* provide platform for building derivatives around core distro
(onion model)
- building blocks - software grouped by theme
(Build Service - repositories)
- infrastructure for building spinoffs
(Build Service - kiwi image build / SUSE Studio)
- spin-offs promotion
("gallery" for spin-offs with ratings, download links, etc.)
* support diversity
- openSUSE as a base for MeeGo, OpenWRT and other projects
- desktop spin-offs for users (KDE, GNOME, LXDE, Xfce)
- specialized spin-offs like Education, Photo edition
3.) Activities:
3.a.) We need to be excellent in the following:
* provide stable core packages with LTS (Factory)
* openSUSE Build Service
* provide tools for remote system administration
* process/mechanism to qualify those custom distribution for usage of
openSUSE name/trademark
* large testing of various OBS repositories combinations
3.b.) We will try to do the following effectively:
* provide the openSUSE distro as it is today (no long term support)
* provide environment for web development (webserver/database stack)
* provide development tools for C/C++, Java, C#, J, Python, Ruby, ...
* collaboration with upstream
* collaboration with other Linux distros
3.c.) As project, we will not focus on the following anymore:
* There are many packages that exist in Factory and we don't know if
they are used or needed. We'll have them in major OBS projects only.
I’m a KDE user and used Suse for more than 5 (five) years now. Anyway, I’m
disappointed by this very poor release and seriously think on moving to Kubuntu
or Fedora KDE spin. It looks like a thing done hasty and without love.
OpenSUSE 11.3 it’s a very poor release because:
After installing the 11.3 GM 64 bit DVD, the release notes that were
automatically downloaded were about the Factory version
After installation, the system keeps on freezing (I thing it’s a KMS related
problem). Insufficient testing for a mainstream distro like openSUSE.
The whole installation system is antique and less shiny compared to the one
in Kubuntu. It should auto detetct and use the display’s native resolution, bu
it doesn’t.
And not to forget that whole green theme. It is a bad joke and appropriate
only for a Factory version.
When you type in a console “yast2 runle” and press the TAB it doesn’t
autocomplete anymore (like in 11.2). This is just one example (the same applies
to disk module, lan module, sw_single module, etc)
It doesn’t provide a live DVD from within you can start the installation.
I used to love openSUSE. Now I think that the SUSE coordinators should catch up
with the times and take a look at a modern linux distro like Kubuntu,
especially for the mentioned points (1,2,3,4 and 6).
Reducing the number of packages in Factory and expanding the number of repos is a bad idea. This is one of the things for which OpenSUSE is already criticized.
grip2die wrote:
> I’m a KDE user and used Suse for more than 5 (five) years now.
[snip]
> I used to love openSUSE. [snip]
thanks for the thoughts (placed in the wrong forum and thread) first
time poster who has used “Suse for more than 5 (five) years” and still can’t spell it…
suggestion: use what works for you…that is what i do, and suggest
all other to do likewise…
but unlike some, i don’t visit Kubuntu or other fora to bellyache and
disrespect their efforts…
> OpenSUSE 11.3 it’s a very poor release because:
> 1. After installing the 11.3 GM 64 bit DVD, the release notes that
> were automatically downloaded were about the Factory version
> 2. After installation, the system keeps on freezing (I thing it’s a
> KMS related problem). Insufficient testing for a mainstream distro
> like openSUSE.
> 3. The whole installation system is antique and less shiny compared to
> the one in Kubuntu. It should auto detetct and use the display’s
> native resolution, but it doesn’t.
> 4. And not to forget that whole green theme. It is a bad joke and
> appropriate only for a Factory version.
> 5. When you type in a console “yast2 runle” and press the TAB it
> doesn’t autocomplete anymore (like in 11.2). This is just one example
> (the same applies to disk module, lan module, sw_single module, etc)
> 6. It doesn’t provide a live DVD from within you can start the
> installation.
> I used to love openSUSE. Now I think that the SUSE coordinators should
> catch up with the times and take a look at a modern linux distro like
> Kubuntu, especially for the mentioned points (1,2,3,4 and 6).
Troll. Of the six issues you have mentioned only #2 is real, the rest
are just your opinion or very minor details.
let’s be nice to each other. The user has a few points - ok, the green color you can like or dislike, but 5 is an unfortunate polish issue, as is 3, despite both being minor. Fixing such minor issues is what made Ubuntu so big!
Of course Kubuntu doesn’t do much better than oS, more like worse, but at least they try to indeed fix such things. It wouldn’t be a bad idea if we would, too. At least, if we decide we want to cater to end users and we thus decide against the strategy being talked about here!
So what do we think about this strategy? Should openSUSE scale back it’s ambitions, and turn into a debian like distribution where the actual end product is less important than the platform it provides?
Given debian is well established along with highly visible derivatives, what project “objective(s)” does this strategy expect to fulfill?
From a brand/marketing perspective, openSUSE would be in direct competition with debian + all its derivatives (deb v. rpm etc). How well have the KDE derivative distros done based on debian, at the moment I can only think of Mepis? Also, isn’t debian relatively free of commercial interference or conflict of interest which could be important to potential distro builders?
For market positioning reasons and little past derivative success, I see this as a very risky strategy offering little or no benefit to the current user base. I could envisage lots of openSUSE users departing. By all means disagree here!
The center of this strategy is a high quality and long-term supported
core distribution surrounded by tools to build derivatives which
includes remote system administration. Behind that we will have
a marketing team spreading the word about our Project and the
derivatives made with it. Additionally, we will provide derivatives
for desktops, server usage, software and web development. To be
successful we see the collaboration with upstream and other Linux
distributions as a key factor in providing quality derivatives.
Time will tell
2.) Key ideas:
reduce the number of packages in Factory
provide smaller, stable, high quality core distro
provide Long Term Support (LTS) for this reduced set
core suitable for servers
available for more platforms (including ARM, PowerPC, etc.)
provide platform for building derivatives around core distro
(onion model)
building blocks - software grouped by theme
(Build Service - repositories)
infrastructure for building spinoffs
(Build Service - kiwi image build / SUSE Studio)
spin-offs promotion
(“gallery” for spin-offs with ratings, download links, etc.)
support diversity
openSUSE as a base for MeeGo, OpenWRT and other projects
desktop spin-offs for users (KDE, GNOME, LXDE, Xfce)
specialized spin-offs like Education, Photo edition
One of things I liked about other older Linux Distro’s that I missed when coming to openSUSE was the 3 to 5 DVD set dvd-1 gave the base system with GUI choices dvd-2 had added value contribs and the others were sources, development, and trials if I remember right.
3.) Activities:
3.a.) We need to be excellent in the following:
provide stable core packages with LTS (Factory)
openSUSE Build Service
provide tools for remote system administration
process/mechanism to qualify those custom distribution for usage of
openSUSE name/trademark
large testing of various OBS repositories combinations
3.b.) We will try to do the following effectively:
provide the openSUSE distro as it is today (no long term support)
provide environment for web development (webserver/database stack)
provide development tools for C/C++, Java, C#, J, Python, Ruby, …
collaboration with upstream
collaboration with other Linux distros
3c below kinda hampers this, as does NLTS developers for services, programming and integration are already hampered by too much need to recreate the tools at each new release. Think of a car, If your intention is to drive from A to B to deliver passengers how effective will it be if the car comes with square wheels that need replacing every 15 feet. True your at the mercy of kernel changes that break things but that is no excuse to further break things. In all major key systems, the core or base MUST be stable with long term support and the contributions layer is what get tweeked and thusly less main support.
The LINUX Kernel is the base core for LINUX - all Distro’s
openSUSE version xxx is the base core for the Distro and should encompass the CLI, special Distro Tools (distro uniqueness, and the core of the GUI desktop if chosen.
Component apps of the desktop, and other contrib user apps would be target of less long term support.
Programming tools (IDE, etc…) are a grey area necessary for developers, sometimes necessary for users to do install but usually not necessary to end users normal ops.
3.c.) As project, we will not focus on the following anymore:
There are many packages that exist in Factory and we don’t know if
they are used or needed. We’ll have them in major OBS projects only.
Great already there are hundreds of posts where joe general user is scoffed at for not keeping to the standard 3 or four repos because something needed isn’t there or up to date, and now you want to further choose to decide what an end user uses.
So the strategy here is to make the distro less “runs out-of-the-box” and more of a “install this - now search find install all the stuff we don’t think you need”
OK let me see if I got this right. We are talking about an Opensuse like this:
11.3 supported for a little while
12.0 " " " " "
12.1 " " " " "
12.2 a LTS supported for 2 years or more
12.3 supported for a little while…
Here’s what I don’t get
Are we talking repo that is LTS with LTS apps?
Are we talking getting control of the repos by reducing the number? (the KDE repos come to mind)
Are we talking making the OBS a place to go for stuff not in the standard repos?
Like Gecko-mediaplayer in 11.3 & the Red Dwarf OBS?
Or are we talking setting up a system for someone that wants to make their own distro based on Suse & call it Cocoa Linux?
Introducing that release numbering may be inappropriate and introduce issues and detail (e.g what repos?) that doesn’t need solving at the strategic level, but it will be if the strategy is adopted. Think debian. They have multiple releases available (e.g stable/testing/unstable) per version, with their own sets of repos for each release. The core release is LTS. Someone who makes their own distro can chose to base it any of those. So it’s not an OR, but an AND. It’s only my interpretation from the strategy document though.
It would be useful if we had some sort of download statistics of applications downloaded from the OSS repository, so that we could make a better assessment as to what applications could be moved off to a derivative and which ones need to stay on the main distribution release.
That would always be useful. Do you have any particular derivative in mind?
I thought the series of draft strategies that included this one were buried, in favour of the clearer and published (Wiki) appraisal of what/who the openSUSE distro was aimed at, and how the project would deliver that within constraints (i.e. what they wouldn’t do).
Kubuntu will get oxygen or oxygen like theme in 2011.
But we don’t have any such problems.
Kubuntu users have to use alien to convert .rpm to .deb rarely but they do.
We at open suse have one click install for many apllications.
They have a nice font.
we don’t
Kubuntu 10.10 is pretty unstable if compared to open suse 11.3 (note:10.10)
already there are hundreds of posts where joe general user is scoffed at for not keeping to the standard 3 or four repos because something needed isn’t there or up to date, and now you want to further choose to decide what an end user uses.