[openSLE] Status of initiative

Boyd Lynn Gerber gerberb at zenez.com
Fri Oct 9 15:57:51 MDT 2009

Boyd Gerber <gerberb at zenez.com> 801 849-0213
ZENEZ	1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah  84047

On Fri, 9 Oct 2009, Yury Gladky wrote:
> Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>> OpenSUSE LTS.  The people supporting this think we should start with
>> openSUSE 11.2.
> It is planned to support all versions of openSuSE, or selectively (in 2
> issues or kernel = SLE, for example) ?

Yes, I personally think we should only do the same releases as SLES if we 
do this option.  Others think we should do them all.  So it has not been 
decided. I am waiting on a few emails from within Novell, so I can present 
the full picture of what we are able to do.

>> openSLES.  The people supporting this think we need to get started
> right now and start with SLES 11.
> 1. + Will be binary compatible with SLE.
> 2. -  Repository will be significantly poorer.

I do not think there will be less quality.  We would be using the same 
exact code, with removing the trade marks, product proprietary code, and 
such.  It would be exactly like CentOS is to RedHat.

> 3. -  The higher number of problems with the hardware.

No,  exactly the same as SLES.

> 4. ? I do not quite understand the policy on the distribution of Novell
> src.rpm.

We would be doing the same to the SUSE Linux as CentOS does to RedHat now. 
We are seeking someone with legal background/specializing with open source 
and the various legal issues.  This will be a must for the openSLES 

> In RedHat, I have to freely access. At Novell, I can only get them by 
> buying support, or someone who bought support.

The src.rpm's are on the iso for SLES.  The src.rpm for patches, come with a 
support lic.  So we have to have a SLES subscription.  It has been pointed 
out that there is a small possibility that Novell upper management could 
demand the invalidation of the SLES license being used.  This is where we 
have to have all the i's dotted and the t's crossed.  That is we can not 
have any thing left in the openSLSE optition that could be used as a legal 
basis to invalidate the lic.  That is why we need to have where possible 
RPM lint checks in place to flag packages before they are publicly 
released.  With this option we also have to have an independent Build 
Service *IBS).  Nothing will be released publiclly till we are sure we 
have met the requirements to provide this.  We want to try and avoid where 
possible people using this option (if it is choosen) when they really 
should have a SUSE Linux/SLES license.  We really want this option to be a 
spring board for SLES where people really do need the support fro a larger 
organization(Novell).  I am a little concerned with this option because we 
do not want to take sales away from Novell.  We really want to be able to 
gently push people toward SLES where it makes sense.

> This is consistent with the principle of reasonable fees for 
> distribution?
> After trying to compile some packages from SLE I have the feeling that 
> the assembly of binary packages took place, other src.rpm, than that 
> provided by Novell.
> It was in their own interest to both projects.
> As a home user I am interested in  openSuSE LTS,
> as IT-manager I am interested in  SLES.

Novell does meet OSS rules for their RPM's including SRPM's.  There are 
more discussion going on behind the seens right now.  I can not at this 
time release information about this.  I am waiting for some emails from 
within Novell and others at the top of this small organization, before I 
am able to publicly express anything more on this at this time.

We are looking seriously at three options.

1 SLES removing required stuff, and providing a binary compatible SLES.
2 OpenSUSE LTS, same packages as SLES but using the openSUSE versions.
3.OpenSUSE LTS similary to the the curent SERVER CD, with a few more packages
   that are server related.

both LTS options are currently only going to be to the same openSUSE 
release as SLES with the exception of openSUSE 11.2.  It will be the 
starting place for the current openSUSE LTS options.

More will be given once we finish our communication with the various 
parties including the openSUSE and SLES management with some input from 
people above both groups where needed.  Until we get the OK to make public 
the information we will have to have it stay between us that are in direct 
communication with Novell and Novell people..

I hope this gives everyone on the openSLE list an update to the current 
state of affairs.  We are working hard to make this become a reality. 
Please allow us the time to get the best information we can to provide all 
interested parties with up to date information.  Once we have this we will 
have a vote.  Although the project is a dictatorship at the moment.  We 
will accept any assistance in making this project a reality we can all 
live with.


Boyd Gerber <gerberb at zenez.com> 801 849-0213
ZENEZ	1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah  84047

More information about the OpenSLE mailing list