Blog Entry

Submitted by Ian (not verified) on 24 November 2006 - 7:57pm.

I think the invite was pretty weak form. It's poaching, pure and simple. Mark has to see the difference between the Enterprise Novell Products and a project Novell supports.

Submitted by Andreas Jaeger (not verified) on 25 November 2006 - 5:00am.

I think it's a great idea in general but I get mixed messages about the intented audience. Both Mark and Jriddell (http://www.kdedevelopers.org/node/2552) seem to target the openSUSE community.

Submitted by John C (not verified) on 27 November 2006 - 5:21pm.

Good Evening:

I do understand the turmoil that all this has caused from everyone's perspective. However, I do think Mark preambled and put his letter in context in quite a friendly manner. Anything outside of what he wrote there is simply putting words in his mouth and taking it out of the context with which it was meant.

Further, you should take it as a compliment from Mark to even be considered im this manner. I think everyone is misconstruing his intentions, and instead of attacking the gentlmen, maybe an open dialogue acting like the adults we are would make sense.

I enjoy both your distributions, do i think what Novell has done is worng, simply yes. Microsoft can try to sue based on IP infringement however by doing so, they might have to go on the defensive. I do not think Linux and Kde infringed on anything, if you look at Windows 95, and NT 4, I am sorry to say KDE was and is much more advanced. If anything Windows XP looks like KDE, and Vista just a further extrapolation of the same theme. I need not convince anyone of this.

I firmly believe in our Open Source and the FSF, and we should be thankful for what we have, and who are it's members that make up such a phenomonal piece of software. Have we all forgotten what has made Linux so great? Stop and look at what we have, is there any other OS on this planet as reliable, stable and powerful? A simple thought maybe, but profound when you think about it.

In closing, if anyone wishes to comment on Mark's letter, I think we should all do the same as he did, be considerate, polite and allow Mark to explain, and I do mean explain, not defend.

Call me naive, but I think all Mark was doing was trying to be nice, and was being considerate of the trials and tribulations that the staff of Novell might have been going through. He simply was extending an olive branch and showing what Ubuntu is, which is humanity. It's sad in our day and age, that whenever someone shows kindness and consideration we misinterpret it with alterior motives and hidden agenda.

Sincerely,
John

Submitted by Lily Kelly (not verified) on 27 November 2006 - 8:23pm.

I was a happy Suse 10.0 user, then we had the zen updater mess in 10.1, you provided a sort of solution on this blogg which I was thankful for but then I had further problem's with graphics drivers in 10.1 (which did not happen in 10.0). Too much new stuff was put into 10.1, it became cutting edge with lots of broken bits. I moved to Ubuntu. Awhile later we find Microsft and Novell were doing a deal during the 10.1 mess. Hmmm....Suse has lost it's way, you now cannot expect people to have faith in your distro. Worse still anything you now do will be viewed as a potential trojan horse which could infect Linux. So...what should your developers do? (Ubuntu is still carring the linux flag)

Submitted by Davyd McColl (not verified) on 27 November 2006 - 11:22pm.

The Ubuntu open week does not have, at it's heart, the am to poach developers, OpenSuSE or other. If you actually bothered to read the full post from Mark Shutleworth, with all of the paragraphs in context with one another, then it would be apparent that there's no "poaching" going on here.

Personally, if I were working for Novell, on the OpenSuSE project, I would feel a little shaken right now. That's just me. Perhaps Mark can see this as a possibility for others, because what he is saying simply looks like an open invitation, should anyone feel that their future plans are being compromised by the current goings-on.

This whole thing has become a tit-for-tat argument on a large scale of pettiness -- and I have to admit that I've seen more sour grapes from the OpenSuSE camp than from the Ubuntu, with the main whinge from the OpenSuSE side saying that Ubuntu violate GPL with inclusion of non-GPL'd binary drivers (such as those from NVIDIA).

Hmmm, so what is the package "tiny-nvidia-installer", that I find in my OpenSuSE 10.0 repositories? What is the xorg-x11-driver-nvidia package from the same repository? Not that I have a problem with the binary drivers being included -- I want GLX to work, and this seems to be the only way to get it to work properly. But people should remember that whenever you point a finger at someone else, three point right back at you.

This whole debacle has left a sour taste in my mouth. What was a friendly invitation has been turned into a spitting contest. I'm ashamed to say that I run and maintain OpenSuSE servers. Fortunately, not for much longer -- I'm changing jobs.

Submitted by OpenSource (not verified) on 27 November 2006 - 11:41pm.

I think Mr Mark Shuttleworth is exactly correct that we should defect to Ubuntu, the best linux distro in the world
because OpenSUSE has a very bad project manager while Ubuntu Community Council memebers all have very high
moral standards and principles, loyal to open source community.

Therefore, it is helpful for Novell to change current OpenSUSE project manager to a person with high moral standards and
principles and I have found several memebers within OpenSUSE KDE team are very good candidates.

Submitted by Kerry C (not verified) on 28 November 2006 - 9:24am.

I guess morality is now one of your primary considerations for choosing a linux distribution?

KC

Submitted by Ron van Herk (not verified) on 28 November 2006 - 10:00am.

In my opinion people with high moral standards use their own name when they make comments like this on a blog

Just my € 0,02

Submitted by Luiz Guilherme (not verified) on 28 November 2006 - 11:05am.

Well, let's put it this way: Ballmer says that everyone who doesn't use SuSE Linux is breaking the rules against proprietary software. Linux users (like me) say that Ballmer is a wacko because we don't have anything to do with Microsoft. So, here is the deal: why don't we go all open source and each company decides wether to charge for it's code or not. Of course open source community cannot be blamed for its 'babies', because Microsoft does not own progamming languages skills neither everyone else's knowledge. If 2 guys know how to do something and one of them works at Microsoft, the other guy cannot be punished for knowing the exact same thing and use it somewhere else.

I think, at this time, this is the best way to give an end to this. Let's go all open source and let the big CEOs decide if they want to charge for their software or not.

Submitted by bubonic (not verified) on 28 November 2006 - 8:08pm.

http://m-net.arbornet.org/~bubonic2/suse.png

I think that sums it up.

Submitted by Christian Page (not verified) on 29 November 2006 - 12:49pm.

The Enterprise needs Linux, not the other way around!

Submitted by just me (not verified) on 1 December 2006 - 7:06pm.

Stupid Novell, you'll pay the price you deserve!

Submitted by marck (not verified) on 3 December 2006 - 4:36am.

There were always a lot of people who didn't like Suse (because of YAST. This has nothing to do with Novell (was happening before) and nothing to do with M$. Like this there are a lot of distributions that are estimated or dropped by different user groups.
However since the agreement a fundamental thing has changed: Novell signed something that is formally forbidden by GPL. If there were something mentioning that the collaboration would end with proprietary code nothing elementary would have changed. I mean it is ok and normal that people collaborate (Think about the contract SUN - Microsoft). However it is explicitly said that Microsoft will respect only SUSE and no other open source code. Novell has signed a contract about something that does not belong to Novell. You are not allowed to sell things you don't own. THIS CODE IS GPL OPENSOURCE AND NOT CLOSED!!!!!!!! If you Novell dislike GPL move to FREEBSD. There you have more possibilities to do such things.

Submitted by K Vlastos (not verified) on 6 December 2006 - 4:34am.

Dear Sir: No one disputes that SuSE was a valuable member of the Linux community. It was formerly the finest distribution available in terms of versatility and in what it offered. When Novell purchased SuSE, then the distribution suffered and eventually resulted in that monstrosity called 10.1, with its broken updater - still broken according to the forum. What is at issue is Novell and their whoring attitude with Microsoft. That failed approach on Microsoft's part is reflected now in the recent SCO ruling and the utter collapse of that firm. Clearly Mr. Shuttleworth's fishing expedition was designed to persuade any "remaining" Linux developers to come back into the "right" family and finally forsake Novell.That Linux users are switching distros is a given. Since Novell, SuSE, SUSE, openSUSE has gone far away from being the foremost distro. You poeple had no problem selling 10.1 retail at Novell in its horrible broken condition. THAT is simply a reflection of the Novell degeneracy which inked an impossible deal with Microsoft. The only thing I would fault Shuttlesworth for would be that he considered picking up the remaining Linux developers from Novell, given that they were not at all troubled by putting out a piece of crap like 10.1. And now, 10.2 is on the street with bugs and the excuse is that to clean all the bugs interferes with "the schedule" and that they bugs will be dealt with in 10.3. That is the problem, that the schedule is Novell's and for the community and especially those who purchase the retail edition, it "up yours!" with feeling. One supposes that somewhere there are commercial accounts who were breathlessly awaiting the Novell/MS agreement and the chits that would allow them to escape MS lawsuits but my prediction is that there are not nearly enough fools of that magnitude to keep Novell afloat. Whatever it takes to stop openSUSE from sending out those broken distros is ok with me. If that means Novell at $1.20 a share and gasping, I say let's have it! Thank you Microsoft!

Submitted by Jake (not verified) on 25 December 2006 - 12:37pm.

Bugs aside, your agreement does violate the GPL. Novell, and you, have f(_)cked the community. M$ has already made public comments about Linux violating their IP, thanks to you and your actions. I have finished removing SUSE from every mahcine I have ever installed it on. It felt so good. Next I destroyed all my SUSE install disks, every last one of them. Do you remember what happened to SCO's ability to distibute NMAP. I hope every open source project does the same to your ability to distiribute their software too.

From The GPL Preamble:
Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software
patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free
program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the
program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any
patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.