OpenSuSEInvite

Differences between revisions 1 and 5 (spanning 4 versions)
Revision 1 as of 2006-11-29 20:46:18
Size: 22279
Editor: pool-129-44-212-45
Comment:
Revision 5 as of 2008-08-06 16:24:49
Size: 18690
Editor: localhost
Comment: converted to 1.6 markup
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 1: Line 1:
= Ubuntu Open Week - OpenSuSE Invite Discussion = ## page was renamed from MeetingLogs/OpenWeek OpenSuSEInvite
=
= Ubuntu Open Week - OpenSuSE Invite Discussion - Wed, Nov 29, 2006 ==
Line 3: Line 4:

=== ..[topic/#ubuntu-classroom:tonyyarusso] : Welcome to Ubuntu Open Week, Nov 27 - Dec 2 between 3pm and 9pm UTC | For the schedule, see https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuOpenWeek | Daily sessions start at 1500UTC - to see this in your timezone, visit http://tinyurl.com/ykqc67 | Logs at http://people.ubuntu.com/~fabbione/irclogs | Please keep support questions in #ubuntu | Class discussions+questions in #ubuntu-classroom-chat | Current Session: OpenSuSE Invite Discussion
Line 6: Line 5:
07:02 sabdfl if you want to post questions in -chat, I or jono will pull those into this channel one at a time
Line 9: Line 7:
}}}
''Circus-Killer: what exactly were your initial intentions when you did that invite?''
Line 10: Line 10:
07:04 sabdfl (18:04:05) Circus-Killer: QUESTION: what exactly were your initial intentions when you did that invite?
07:04 sabdfl Circus-Killer: simply to make sure opensuse folks know about this Ubuntu Open Week
 simply to make sure opensuse folks know about this Ubuntu Open Week
Line 13: Line 12:
07:05 sabdfl (18:04:29) mattl: QUESTION: If you could do the invite again, what would you change?
07:05 sabdfl (18:04:30) cronholio: QUESTION: had you known the reactions beforehand, would you still have posted that invitation to your blog and/or the list?
07:05 sabdfl mattl, cronholio: i think i was blunt in the preamble to the invitation
07:05 sabdfl it would have been better to focus on the opportunities to collaborate between the distros, which are also interesting
07:06 sabdfl hopefully some opensuse folks are here, and those opportunities will get explored
07:06 sabdfl i AM very concerned about the novell deal
07:06 sabdfl and i know that many very senior open source developers feel the same way
07:07 sabdfl at least, those who understand how devastating a firm patent claim by microsoft would be
07:07 sabdfl i feel the novell folks who did the deal either did not realise what a potential trap they were walking into, or just ignored it in favour of the cash
07:07 sabdfl either way, its alarming
''mattl: If you could do the invite again, what would you change?''
Line 24: Line 14:
07:08 sabdfl (18:06:14) brent_cool: QUESTION: Would Canonical ever consider any kind of deal with Microsoft, after careful consideration of the impact? Or is *any* deal with Microsoft always completely out of the question due to Microsoft's past?
07:08 sabdfl brent_cool: we actually have an open line of communication with different folks at microsoft
07:08 sabdfl i exchanged mail with someone today who contacted me based on the comments i've made recently
07:09 sabdfl i'm not opposed to microsoft on principle - they've done a lot of good in the world
07:09 sabdfl it would be trite to take such a black-and-white view
07:09 sabdfl however
07:09 sabdfl they play a very hard game, and right now i think we are seeing the beginnings of a push back against linux
07:10 sabdfl part of that push back is competition - office 12 is going to be very cool
07:10 sabdfl good for them
07:10 sabdfl they are stepping up
07:10 sabdfl part of it is community - i think they have been studying community, and working out how they can get some of that vibe into their own scene
07:10 sabdfl hence the blogging, hence the open bug trackers, hence codeplex, hence their shared source licence
07:10 sabdfl all of that is cool
07:10 sabdfl and i would work with them on that sort of thing
07:11 sabdfl however, there's clearly a part of microsoft that just wants to be able to stop linux in its tracks, and right now I think patents are at the top of their list for that
07:11 sabdfl so we have to be very, very careful
07:11 sabdfl listening to Nat Friedman the other day, he said that Novell initiated the deal, and Microsoft then "just slipped in this patent idea"
07:11 sabdfl well, that was naive
07:12 sabdfl it's abundantly clear that this is a significant thrust back from microsoft
07:12 sabdfl if it succeeds, it will mean that linux can never be made freely available
07:12 sabdfl debian, fedora, ubuntu, gentoo would all effectively be illegal in places where microsoft files patents
07:12 sabdfl they file a lot of patents in south africa, for example
07:13 sabdfl so, to sum up
07:13 sabdfl i would work with microsoft on some things, compete on others
07:13 sabdfl on the patent issue, i think we need a furious defense
''cronholio: had you known the reactions beforehand, would you still have posted that invitation to your blog and/or the list?''
Line 50: Line 16:
07:14 sabdfl (18:05:42) freakcode: QUESTION: How do you see it affecting Ubuntu. I mean, like Novell suporting and developing apps for GNOME, that Ubuntu makes use (F-Spot as example). If I'm not wrong, it uses Mono. Is there any "fears" about those components, being taken off in the next release, in order to avoid future problems with Novell?
07:14 sabdfl freakcode: at this stage we have no plans to change package selection based on these events
07:14 sabdfl i don't believe that microsoft actually plans lawsuits in the short term
07:14 sabdfl however, we need to make it clear that option is not open to them, so they focus on pure competition
 i think i was blunt in the preamble to the invitation. it would have been better to focus on the opportunities to collaborate between the distros, which are also interesting. hopefully some opensuse folks are here, and those opportunities will get explored. i AM very concerned about the novell deal and i know that many very senior open source developers feel the same way. at least, those who understand how devastating a firm patent claim by microsoft would be. i feel the novell folks who did the deal either did not realise what a potential trap they were walking into, or just ignored it in favour of the cash. either way, its alarming
Line 55: Line 18:
07:15 sabdfl (18:06:09) highvoltage: QUESTION: Mark, have you read http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?id=1281 , and do you think that it is appropriate that my local company go in and advise them about Ubuntu?
07:15 sabdfl highvoltage: yes, i think a commercial response will send a strong message
07:15 sabdfl as would developers leaving to work elsewhere
''brent_cool: Would Canonical ever consider any kind of deal with Microsoft, after careful consideration of the impact? Or is *any* deal with Microsoft always completely out of the question due to Microsoft's past?''
Line 59: Line 20:
07:16 sabdfl (18:06:28) corstar: QUESTION: have you noticed, Novel has stopped development support for HULA? Do you think this is a trend that will sadly continue after "The Deal"?
07:16 sabdfl i don't think the HULA decision was related to the deal
07:16 sabdfl too much conspiracy there :-)
 we actually have an open line of communication with different folks at microsoft. i exchanged mail with someone today who contacted me based on the comments i've made recently. i'm not opposed to microsoft on principle - they've done a lot of good in the world. it would be trite to take such a black-and-white view. however, they play a very hard game, and right now i think we are seeing the beginnings of a push back against linux. part of that push back is competition - office 12 is going to be very cool. good for them. they are stepping up. part of it is community - i think they have been studying community, and working out how they can get some of that vibe into their own scene. hence the blogging, hence the open bug trackers, hence codeplex, hence their shared source licence. all of that is cool. and i would work with them on that sort of thing. however, there's clearly a part of microsoft that just wants to be able to stop linux in its tracks, and right now I think patents are at the top of their list for that. so we have to be very, very careful. listening to Nat Friedman the other day, he said that Novell initiated the deal, and Microsoft then "just slipped in this patent idea". well, that was naive. it's abundantly clear that this is a significant thrust back from microsoft. if it succeeds, it will mean that linux can never be made freely available. debian, fedora, ubuntu, gentoo would all effectively be illegal in places where microsoft files patents. they file a lot of patents in south africa, for example. so, to sum up, i would work with microsoft on some things, compete on others. on the patent issue, i think we need a furious defense
Line 63: Line 22:
07:16 sabdfl (18:06:57) daxelrod: QUESTION: What is the Ubuntu agreement with Mozilla? Does it propagate to Ubuntu derivatives?
07:16 sabdfl simply that we maintain an open line of communication, and they are happy for us to use the firefox brand at the moment
07:17 sabdfl in future, of course, we might go in different directions, but both fo us are committed to working out whatever issues arise
07:17 sabdfl w.r.t. derivatives, ubuntu would be a natural conduit for the necessary discussions
07:17 sabdfl derivatives are free either to work within that, or fork
07:18 sabdfl (18:07:05) mattl: QUESTION: Have you had any contact with any execs at Novell since they made the announcement, or since your post?
07:18 sabdfl no formal contact, only conversations with angry developers
''freakcode: How do you see it affecting Ubuntu. I mean, like Novell suporting and developing apps for GNOME, that Ubuntu makes use (F-Spot as example). If I'm not wrong, it uses Mono. Is there any "fears" about those components, being taken off in the next release, in order to avoid future problems with Novell?''
Line 71: Line 24:
07:18 sabdfl (18:07:35) rejden: QUESTION: regarding novell and microsft deal about patent issues which now are mostly applyable only in us the opensuse community suffered some kind of stress about that deal. Will ubuntu/canonical prefer to have similiar agreements with the IPR holders, or even cross-patenting with competition or you will prefer to stay on the other side (lets say the real 4 freedoms as defined by the GPL)?
07:19 sabdfl its clear we need to take a more active stance on patents
07:19 sabdfl we'll review the situation and make announcements in that regard when we're ready
07:19 sabdfl for now, its clear our public position is one of strong opposition either to the existence of software patents
07:19 sabdfl or to their use to block access to markets by free software developers
07:20 sabdfl in particular, i'm concerned about the chilling effect of patent threats on the willingness of developers to contribute to free software
 at this stage we have no plans to change package selection based on these events. i don't believe that microsoft actually plans lawsuits in the short term. however, we need to make it clear that option is not open to them, so they focus on pure competition.
Line 78: Line 26:
07:20 sabdfl (18:07:57) LoudMouthMan: QUESTION : Mark unlike other distros your far more visible as a figure head (in my opinion ) and therefore you are a target for criticism when you post any comments. How do you feel about that ?
07:20 sabdfl Sometimes I wish my feet tasted better
07:21 sabdfl It's particularly difficult in cases where I have very strong personal opinions
07:21 sabdfl the good thing is that this is an open community, so members express their own opinions just as loudly
07:22 sabdfl we have had several ubuntu folks publicly take a different position to me, and i like that
''highvoltage: QUESTION: Mark, have you read http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?id=1281 , and do you think that it is appropriate that my local company go in and advise them about Ubuntu?''
Line 84: Line 28:
07:22 sabdfl (18:08:47) fliegenderfrosch: QUESTION: Were you surprised by the largely negative reactions?
07:22 sabdfl I knew it would be controversial, I said as much in the mail
07:23 sabdfl (18:09:09) kalon33: QUESTION: What do you think is great in Suse that we haven't in Ubuntu ?
07:23 sabdfl I think they have some excellent configuraiton management in YaST that I would like to see in Ubuntu
07:23 sabdfl PPPOE, apparently
07:23 sabdfl also, server side config
07:23 sabdfl contributions welcome :-)
07:24 sabdfl for the rest, i haven't ever used it so can't comment
 yes, i think a commercial response will send a strong message as would developers leaving to work elsewhere
Line 93: Line 30:
07:24 sabdfl (18:11:34) rejden: QUESTION: adding to my previous one, did Canonical made any patents/trademark/copyright (IPR) except the legal trademarks of the names and logos? In EPO (European Patent Office) or in United States. Is Canonical considering applying to make patents in the future? What kind of patents that will be?
07:25 sabdfl no, we have never filed for patents, though we often say "gee, this would be a great patent" when we are working on new code
07:25 sabdfl there's a lot in bazaar, from example, that would have been patentable before we released it as GPL
07:25 sabdfl same in LP and of course int he core distro
07:25 sabdfl our livecd approach, ltsp work etc
07:25 sabdfl but we have never filed for patents
''corstar: have you noticed, Novel has stopped development support for HULA? Do you think this is a trend that will sadly continue after "The Deal"?''
Line 100: Line 32:
07:26 sabdfl (18:13:59) KHatfull: QUESTION: If Microsoft does pursue IP suits against Linux how would the Linux community be able to defend itself? Would there be enough evidence to support the notion that there's no Microsoft IP currently being distributed?
07:26 sabdfl It's quite possible that there is code in Linux which does infringe a Microsoft patent
07:26 sabdfl In general, the response could be threefold
07:27 sabdfl (1) show that Microsoft in turn violates a patent, or more, which is held by a Linux-supporting company, thereby acting as a deterrent
07:27 sabdfl (2) Rework the code to avoid the specific terms of the patent
07:27 sabdfl (3) Agree to pay patent fees
07:27 sabdfl Number (3) has issues with some free software licences
07:28 sabdfl We avoid shipping some GPL software, for example, because of patents
 i don't think the HULA decision was related to the deal. too much conspiracy there :-)
Line 109: Line 34:
07:28 sabdfl (18:19:07) popey: QUESTION: Do you feel this deal taints the developers who work for Novell on FLOSS products such as SAMBA?
07:28 sabdfl No
07:28 sabdfl I think the developers were entirely out of the loop on this one
07:28 sabdfl There may have been some senior guys who heard about it before the announcement
07:28 sabdfl but I don't think this was a deliberate step from the developer side
''daxelrod: What is the Ubuntu agreement with Mozilla? Does it propagate to Ubuntu derivatives?''
Line 115: Line 36:
07:30 sabdfl (18:26:06) KHatfull: QUESTION: If Microsoft decides to pursue IP suits and Ubuntu, as a very high profile distro, becomes a target, how vigorous a defense will you/Canonical be able to mount?
07:30 sabdfl We are particularly vulnerable to this
07:30 sabdfl We have no patents with which to mount a deterrent
07:30 sabdfl Nor do we have deep pockets for a protracted lawsuit
07:30 sabdfl That's just how it is
07:30 sabdfl So you can see why I'm very concerned
07:31 sabdfl The same is true of all the distros which aim to be freely available
07:31 sabdfl I'm interested to know how the Microsoft deal relates to OpenSUSE
07:31 sabdfl It's easy to see how a paid product, like SLED, could include the fee to pay Microsoft ("to not sue you")
07:32 sabdfl but with a free, community product, it's not possible to collect the fee
 simply that we maintain an open line of communication, and they are happy for us to use the firefox brand at the moment. in future, of course, we might go in different directions, but both fo us are committed to working out whatever issues arise. w.r.t. derivatives, ubuntu would be a natural conduit for the necessary discussions. derivatives are free either to work within that, or fork
Line 126: Line 38:
07:32 sabdfl (18:26:38) corstar: QUESTION: so, would you guys "ever" patent anything(to protect Open source). Or does that go against the FOSS?
07:32 tonyyarusso riot_: /join #ubuntu-classroom-chat please
07:32 sabdfl if we did file patents, we would licence them to GPL implementations, freely
''mattl: Have you had any contact with any execs at Novell since they made the announcement, or since your post?''
Line 130: Line 40:
07:33 sabdfl (18:28:26) Nat_: QUESTION: Novell, Red Hat, IBM and others put a lot of resources into funding the Open Invention Network and providing it with patents to use to protect Linux in case someone decides to sue a Linux user or distributor for patent infringement. Will Canonical participate in OIN?
07:33 sabdfl We've asked IBM for further details on OIN
07:33 sabdfl We have no patents to contribute, and do not have deep pockets
07:33 sabdfl but it may be that our participation is useful from other perspectives
07:34 sabdfl if so then they may be willing to let us in on terms that would work for us
07:34 sabdfl and then yes, that would be something we could do
07:34 sabdfl (18:29:13) tuxub: Question: Mark, do you think that european community has enough strong will to stand up against microsoft patent politics and, maybe in a few years time, make a turn to openly embrace and promote open source usage by european companies?
07:34 sabdfl So far so good
07:34 sabdfl I think this will require eternal vigilance, though
07:35 sabdfl since the pressure from IP holders to expand the scope of their property is very high
07:35 sabdfl and there is not a strong voice for the commons
07:35 sabdfl however
07:35 sabdfl the free software movement, and now also the creative commons movement, have gained significant mindshare
07:35 sabdfl hopefully, that continues to build
 no formal contact, only conversations with angry developers
Line 145: Line 42:
07:36 sabdfl (18:29:27) andresmujica: QUESTION: Do you expect that ubuntu evolves as a mainly desktop distro or are you planning to put more effort at server side? Is any chance that SUSE's expertise on KDE would help the kubuntu's development?
07:36 sabdfl andresmujica: we are currently hiring both desktop and server developers
''rejden: regarding novell and microsft deal about patent issues which now are mostly applyable only in us the opensuse community suffered some kind of stress about that deal. Will ubuntu/canonical prefer to have similiar agreements with the IPR holders, or even cross-patenting with competition or you will prefer to stay on the other side (lets say the real 4 freedoms as defined by the GPL)?''
Line 148: Line 44:
07:36 sabdfl (18:29:57) amachu: QUESTION: Education sector the real arena where Ubuntu can prove decisive.. Mark, how do compare with Microsoft's educational suites with Edubuntu?
07:36 sabdfl I think the best thing that free software does in education is DIVERSITY
07:36 sabdfl we don't (yet) have the best word processor
07:37 sabdfl though we have at least three *pretty good* ones
07:37 sabdfl what we do have is a huge spectrum of tools
07:37 sabdfl for all sorts of disciplines
07:37 sabdfl music, art, maths, physics, statistics, programming, design
07:37 sabdfl you name it
07:37 sabdfl and those tools are free of charge
07:37 sabdfl and OPEN
07:37 sabdfl you can see how the tools work
07:37 sabdfl and you can shape them
07:37 sabdfl that's a treasure chest for education
07:38 sabdfl especially in places where the kids are often smarter than the teachers
07:38 sabdfl so, we should focus on that
 its clear we need to take a more active stance on patents. we'll review the situation and make announcements in that regard when we're ready. for now, its clear our public position is one of strong opposition either to the existence of software patents or to their use to block access to markets by free software developers. in particular, i'm concerned about the chilling effect of patent threats on the willingness of developers to contribute to free software
Line 164: Line 46:
07:38 sabdfl (18:30:29) oblio: QUESTION: what do you think about mono entering gnome base? after all, it's surely cause for concern at M$\
07:38 sabdfl The mono guys have done awesome work
07:38 sabdfl it would be very sad to have that come under a cloud now
07:39 sabdfl at this stage, we have no plans to drop mono because of these concerns
07:39 sabdfl Novell has said that they believe there are no patent issues
07:39 sabdfl and we believe that is in good faith
''LoudMouthMan: Mark unlike other distros your far more visible as a figure head (in my opinion ) and therefore you are a target for criticism when you post any comments. How do you feel about that ?''
Line 171: Line 48:
07:40 sabdfl (18:34:37) jjtec1: QUESTION: What can we as community do to influence this bad deal?
07:40 sabdfl jjtec1: first, i thnk the terms of the deal are not yet set in stone
07:40 sabdfl i suspect there is a lot of activity internally at novell
07:40 sabdfl with developers trying to help set things right
07:41 sabdfl add your voice to theirs
07:41 sabdfl speak with opensuse folks and see if you can help them make the case for novell management to take a stronger line
07:41 sabdfl also, watch gpl v3
07:41 sabdfl i hope that this deal does not upset the balance of the v3 discussion
07:41 sabdfl we need v3 to be a balanced licence, not unduly influenced by the issue du jour
07:42 sabdfl but this has certianly thrown the patent question into stark relief
07:42 sabdfl (18:35:02) MisterN: QUESTION: is Canonical / Ubuntu actively lobbying against software patents? (i already asked but with wrong case)
07:42 sabdfl we have not done enough
07:42 sabdfl individually, canonical folks have always spoken against software patents
07:42 sabdfl but we are not part of a formal lobby group, for example
 Sometimes I wish my feet tasted better. It's particularly difficult in cases where I have very strong personal opinions. the good thing is that this is an open community, so members express their own opinions just as loudly. we have had several ubuntu folks publicly take a different position to me, and i like that
Line 186: Line 50:
07:43 sabdfl (18:39:47) _MMA_: QUESTION: With IBM's seemingly great support for linux do you think they would do well to jump back into the desktop market? Ubuntu-powered IBM desktop anyone? ;)
07:43 sabdfl No, I think IBM is not yet really engaged in the desktop market
07:43 sabdfl for them, the focus remains servers
07:44 sabdfl they sold their desktop PC business (and were very happy to get rid of it)
07:44 sabdfl that said
07:44 sabdfl they do have a big global business managing office PC's for other companies
07:44 sabdfl that's where I would expect them to climb in
07:44 sabdfl (18:40:27) sjoeboo: QUESTION: mark, You recently blogged a bit about the pros and cons of non-free drivers and codecs, and reasons to include some and not the others. Has a "final" decision been made about non-free drivers from here on out?
07:45 sabdfl this is tangential to the opensuse discussion, but it's controversial and topical so...
07:45 sabdfl no
07:45 sabdfl no final decision has been made
07:45 sabdfl the discussion is ongoing on ubuntu-devel, forums, blogs, email
07:45 sabdfl i've expressed an opinion, as have other members of the tech board
07:45 sabdfl i think the final position will be a nuanced, careful, clear one
07:46 sabdfl that maintains our commitment to making your hardware work, while still promoting only free software applications
07:46 sabdfl we are unlikely to become gNewSense
07:46 sabdfl nor are we suddenly going to become Mint Linux
07:46 sabdfl our place is in the middle
07:47 sabdfl ok
''fliegenderfrosch: Were you surprised by the largely negative reactions?''

 I knew it would be controversial, I said as much in the mail

''kalon33: What do you think is great in Suse that we haven't in Ubuntu ?''

 I think they have some excellent configuraiton management in YaST that I would like to see in Ubuntu. PPPOE, apparently. also, server side config. contributions welcome :-) for the rest, i haven't ever used it so can't comment


''rejden: adding to my previous one, did Canonical made any patents/trademark/copyright (IPR) except the legal trademarks of the names and logos? In EPO (European Patent Office) or in United States. Is Canonical considering applying to make patents in the future? What kind of patents that will be?''

 no, we have never filed for patents, though we often say "gee, this would be a great patent" when we are working on new code. there's a lot in bazaar, from example, that would have been patentable before we released it as GPL, same in LP and of course int he core distro, our livecd approach, ltsp work etc but we have never filed for patents

''KHatfull: If Microsoft does pursue IP suits against Linux how would the Linux community be able to defend itself? Would there be enough evidence to support the notion that there's no Microsoft IP currently being distributed?''

 It's quite possible that there is code in Linux which does infringe a Microsoft patent. In general, the response could be threefold.

  (1) show that Microsoft in turn violates a patent, or more, which is held by a Linux-supporting company, thereby acting as a deterrent
  (2) Rework the code to avoid the specific terms of the patent
  (3) Agree to pay patent fees

 Number (3) has issues with some free software licences. We avoid shipping some GPL software, for example, because of patents

''popey: Do you feel this deal taints the developers who work for Novell on FLOSS products such as SAMBA?''

 No. I think the developers were entirely out of the loop on this one. There may have been some senior guys who heard about it before the announcement, but I don't think this was a deliberate step from the developer side

''KHatfull: If Microsoft decides to pursue IP suits and Ubuntu, as a very high profile distro, becomes a target, how vigorous a defense will you/Canonical be able to mount?''

 We are particularly vulnerable to this. We have no patents with which to mount a deterrent. Nor do we have deep pockets for a protracted lawsuit. That's just how it is. So you can see why I'm very concerned. The same is true of all the distros which aim to be freely available. I'm interested to know how the Microsoft deal relates to OpenSUSE. It's easy to see how a paid product, like SLED, could include the fee to pay Microsoft ("to not sue you") but with a free, community product, it's not possible to collect the fee

''corstar: so, would you guys "ever" patent anything(to protect Open source). Or does that go against the FOSS?''

 if we did file patents, we would licence them to GPL implementations, freely.

''Nat_: Novell, Red Hat, IBM and others put a lot of resources into funding the Open Invention Network and providing it with patents to use to protect Linux in case someone decides to sue a Linux user or distributor for patent infringement. Will Canonical participate in OIN?''

 We've asked IBM for further details on OIN. We have no patents to contribute, and do not have deep pockets, but it may be that our participation is useful from other perspectives. if so then they may be willing to let us in on terms that would work for us. and then yes, that would be something we could do

''tuxub: Mark, do you think that european community has enough strong will to stand up against microsoft patent politics and, maybe in a few years time, make a turn to openly embrace and promote open source usage by european companies?''

 So far so good. I think this will require eternal vigilance, though. since the pressure from IP holders to expand the scope of their property is very high and there is not a strong voice for the commons. however, the free software movement, and now also the creative commons movement, have gained significant mindshare. hopefully, that continues to build

''andresmujica: Do you expect that ubuntu evolves as a mainly desktop distro or are you planning to put more effort at server side? Is any chance that SUSE's expertise on KDE would help the kubuntu's development?''

 we are currently hiring both desktop and server developers

''amachu: Education sector the real arena where Ubuntu can prove decisive.. Mark, how do compare with Microsoft's educational suites with Edubuntu?''

 I think the best thing that free software does in education is DIVERSITY. we don't (yet) have the best word processor. though we have at least three *pretty good* ones. what we do have is a huge spectrum of tools. for all sorts of disciplines music, art, maths, physics, statistics, programming, design. you name it. and those tools are free of charge and OPEN. you can see how the tools work and you can shape them. that's a treasure chest for education. especially in places where the kids are often smarter than the teachers. so, we should focus on that

''oblio: what do you think about mono entering gnome base? after all, it's surely cause for concern at M$\''

 The mono guys have done awesome work. it would be very sad to have that come under a cloud now. at this stage, we have no plans to drop mono because of these concerns. Novell has said that they believe there are no patent issues and we believe that is in good faith

''jjtec1: What can we as community do to influence this bad deal?''

 first, i thnk the terms of the deal are not yet set in stone. i suspect there is a lot of activity internally at novell with developers trying to help set things right. add your voice to theirs. speak with opensuse folks and see if you can help them make the case for novell management to take a stronger line. also, watch gpl v3. i hope that this deal does not upset the balance of the v3 discussion. we need v3 to be a balanced licence, not unduly influenced by the issue du jour, but this has certianly thrown the patent question into stark relief

''MisterN: is Canonical / Ubuntu actively lobbying against software patents? (i already asked but with wrong case)''

 we have not done enough. individually, canonical folks have always spoken against software patents, but we are not part of a formal lobby group, for example

''_MMA_: With IBM's seemingly great support for linux do you think they would do well to jump back into the desktop market? Ubuntu-powered IBM desktop anyone? ;)''

 No, I think IBM is not yet really engaged in the desktop market. for them, the focus remains servers. they sold their desktop PC business (and were very happy to get rid of it). that said, they do have a big global business managing office PC's for other companies. that's where I would expect them to climb in

''sjoeboo: mark, You recently blogged a bit about the pros and cons of non-free drivers and codecs, and reasons to include some and not the others. Has a "final" decision been made about non-free drivers from here on out?''

 this is tangential to the opensuse discussion, but it's controversial and topical so... no. no final decision has been made. the discussion is ongoing on ubuntu-devel, forums, blogs, email. i've expressed an opinion, as have other members of the tech board. i think the final position will be a nuanced, careful, clear one. that maintains our commitment to making your hardware work, while still promoting only free software applications. we are unlikely to become gNewSense. nor are we suddenly going to become Mint Linux. our place is in the middle.
{{{
Line 206: Line 122:
Line 210: Line 125:
Line 222: Line 136:
}}}
''jku_: Nat_, so you disagree with sabdfl about the meaning/importance of the patent-part of the deal? Do you see no ill effects for the free software community?''
Line 223: Line 139:
07:52 sabdfl (18:52:13) jku_: QUESTION: Nat_, so you disagree with sabdfl about the meaning/importance of the patent-part of the deal? Do you see no ill effects for the free software community?
07:52 Nat_
Personally I think we got MS to acknowledge that Linux is real, that it matters; we got a lot of money from them that we can use to continue to subsidize writing free software -- software that shows up in Ubuntu, for example; we didn't violate the GPL and I don't think there's any real harm to any other parties.
 [Nat_] Personally I think we got MS to acknowledge that Linux is real, that it matters; we got a lot of money from them that we can use to continue to subsidize writing free software -- software that shows up in Ubuntu, for example; we didn't violate the GPL and I don't think there's any real harm to any other parties.
Line 226: Line 141:
07:53 sabdfl (18:52:16) KHatfull: QUESTION: (for Nat_) Can you give us the short 3-5 sentence statement on what the Novell/MS deal means to someone iside openSUSE?
07:53 Nat_ Microsoft has been making threatening noises about Linux and their patents for years and years, that's nothing new
07:53 Nat_ I think it menas basically nothing for someone inside opensuse, except I hope it means that we get to hire more people to contribute to opensuse.
07:54 Nat_ One of the things we asked Microsoft to put in the deal, and which they tried to put in, is a promise never to sue a person for their association with free software
07:54 Nat_ They didn't do a great job of that, but they're going to redraft it and we hope to see something improved at some point soon :-)
''KHatfull: (for Nat_) Can you give us the short 3-5 sentence statement on what the Novell/MS deal means to someone iside openSUSE?''
Line 232: Line 143:
07:54 sabdfl (18:53:03) LoudMouthMan: QUESTION: NAT_ can you introduce your self and clarify your relationship with OPensuse and Suse/Novell ?
07:54 sabdfl drumroll...
07:54 Nat_ Oh, I'm Nat Friedman, I cofounded a company called Ximian in 1999; in 2003 we sold it to Novell; now I'm CTO of the Linux group at Novell. I live in Germany.
07:55 sabdfl (18:53:38) apokryphos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Friedman
 [Nat_] Microsoft has been making threatening noises about Linux and their patents for years and years, that's nothing new. I think it menas basically nothing for someone inside opensuse, except I hope it means that we get to hire more people to contribute to opensuse. One of the things we asked Microsoft to put in the deal, and which they tried to put in, is a promise never to sue a person for their association with free software. They didn't do a great job of that, but they're going to redraft it and we hope to see something improved at some point soon :-)
Line 237: Line 145:
07:54 sabdfl (18:53:27) Bourlotieris: QUESTION: "No real harm done" - do you believe that Balmer would make the UNACCEPTABLE announcement he did a few days ago if there was no deal with Novell?
07:54 Nat_ Well, first I agree that Ballmer's statements were totally unacceptable
07:55 Nat_
and our CEO published an open letter in which he said the same thing
07:55 Nat_
But, it doesn't take a lot of google searching to determine that he's been saying approximately those same things for years and years, independent of any dealings with Novell
07:55 Nat_
So, yes, I think he would have been saying that stuff anyway.
07:56 Nat_
Novell is not released
07:56 Nat_
Microsoft could sue Novell at any time, that's not prohibited in the contract
07:56 Nat_
We would be protected by our own patent portfolio (which we could use to sue Microsoft back) and by OIN, which we helped create.
07:56 Nat_
If you don't know OIN -- check out www.openinventionnetwork.com. it's a company that pools patents and uses them to protect Linux
07:57 Nat_
so if someone sues Canonical, or Red Hat, or Debian, over a Linux-related patent infringement, OIN will sue them back
07:57 Nat_
Novell helped OIN get all of the patents they have today.
07:57 Nat_
Novell didn't actually need that protection itself (becuase we already had ~400 patents)... but we did it anyway
07:57 Nat_ yep
''LoudMouthMan: NAT_ can you introduce your self and clarify your relationship with OPensuse and Suse/Novell ?''

 [Nat_] Oh, I'm Nat Friedman, I cofounded a company called Ximian in 1999; in 2
003 we sold it to Novell; now I'm CTO of the Linux group at Novell. I live in Germany.

 [apokryphos] http
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Friedman

 ''
Bourlotieris: "No real harm done" - do you believe that Balmer would make the UNACCEPTABLE announcement he did a few days ago if there was no deal with Novell?''

 [
Nat_] Well, first I agree that Ballmer's statements were totally unacceptable and our CEO published an open letter in which he said the same thing. But, it doesn't take a lot of google searching to determine that he's been saying approximately those same things for years and years, independent of any dealings with Novell. So, yes, I think he would have been saying that stuff anyway. Novell is not released. Microsoft could sue Novell at any time, that's not prohibited in the contract. We would be protected by our own patent portfolio (which we could use to sue Microsoft back) and by OIN, which we helped create. If you don't know OIN -- check out www.openinventionnetwork.com. it's a company that pools patents and uses them to protect Linux. so if someone sues Canonical, or Red Hat, or Debian, over a Linux-related patent infringement, OIN will sue them back. Novell helped OIN get all of the patents they have today.Novell didn't actually need that protection itself (becuase we already had ~400 patents)... but we did it anyway

{{{
Line 251: Line 157:
Line 257: Line 162:

Ubuntu Open Week - OpenSuSE Invite Discussion - Wed, Nov 29, 2006

07:02   sabdfl  we called this particular session to discuss my invitation to the opensuse folks to join us in the open week
07:03   sabdfl  fire away
07:04   sabdfl  so far so good :-)

Circus-Killer: what exactly were your initial intentions when you did that invite?

  • simply to make sure opensuse folks know about this Ubuntu Open Week

mattl: If you could do the invite again, what would you change?

cronholio: had you known the reactions beforehand, would you still have posted that invitation to your blog and/or the list?

  • i think i was blunt in the preamble to the invitation. it would have been better to focus on the opportunities to collaborate between the distros, which are also interesting. hopefully some opensuse folks are here, and those opportunities will get explored. i AM very concerned about the novell deal and i know that many very senior open source developers feel the same way. at least, those who understand how devastating a firm patent claim by microsoft would be. i feel the novell folks who did the deal either did not realise what a potential trap they were walking into, or just ignored it in favour of the cash. either way, its alarming

brent_cool: Would Canonical ever consider any kind of deal with Microsoft, after careful consideration of the impact? Or is *any* deal with Microsoft always completely out of the question due to Microsoft's past?

  • we actually have an open line of communication with different folks at microsoft. i exchanged mail with someone today who contacted me based on the comments i've made recently. i'm not opposed to microsoft on principle - they've done a lot of good in the world. it would be trite to take such a black-and-white view. however, they play a very hard game, and right now i think we are seeing the beginnings of a push back against linux. part of that push back is competition - office 12 is going to be very cool. good for them. they are stepping up. part of it is community - i think they have been studying community, and working out how they can get some of that vibe into their own scene. hence the blogging, hence the open bug trackers, hence codeplex, hence their shared source licence. all of that is cool. and i would work with them on that sort of thing. however, there's clearly a part of microsoft that just wants to be able to stop linux in its tracks, and right now I think patents are at the top of their list for that. so we have to be very, very careful. listening to Nat Friedman the other day, he said that Novell initiated the deal, and Microsoft then "just slipped in this patent idea". well, that was naive. it's abundantly clear that this is a significant thrust back from microsoft. if it succeeds, it will mean that linux can never be made freely available. debian, fedora, ubuntu, gentoo would all effectively be illegal in places where microsoft files patents. they file a lot of patents in south africa, for example. so, to sum up, i would work with microsoft on some things, compete on others. on the patent issue, i think we need a furious defense

freakcode: How do you see it affecting Ubuntu. I mean, like Novell suporting and developing apps for GNOME, that Ubuntu makes use (F-Spot as example). If I'm not wrong, it uses Mono. Is there any "fears" about those components, being taken off in the next release, in order to avoid future problems with Novell?

  • at this stage we have no plans to change package selection based on these events. i don't believe that microsoft actually plans lawsuits in the short term. however, we need to make it clear that option is not open to them, so they focus on pure competition.

highvoltage: QUESTION: Mark, have you read http://www.tectonic.co.za/view.php?id=1281 , and do you think that it is appropriate that my local company go in and advise them about Ubuntu?

  • yes, i think a commercial response will send a strong message as would developers leaving to work elsewhere

corstar: have you noticed, Novel has stopped development support for HULA? Do you think this is a trend that will sadly continue after "The Deal"?

  • i don't think the HULA decision was related to the deal. too much conspiracy there Smile :-)

daxelrod: What is the Ubuntu agreement with Mozilla? Does it propagate to Ubuntu derivatives?

  • simply that we maintain an open line of communication, and they are happy for us to use the firefox brand at the moment. in future, of course, we might go in different directions, but both fo us are committed to working out whatever issues arise. w.r.t. derivatives, ubuntu would be a natural conduit for the necessary discussions. derivatives are free either to work within that, or fork

mattl: Have you had any contact with any execs at Novell since they made the announcement, or since your post?

  • no formal contact, only conversations with angry developers

rejden: regarding novell and microsft deal about patent issues which now are mostly applyable only in us the opensuse community suffered some kind of stress about that deal. Will ubuntu/canonical prefer to have similiar agreements with the IPR holders, or even cross-patenting with competition or you will prefer to stay on the other side (lets say the real 4 freedoms as defined by the GPL)?

  • its clear we need to take a more active stance on patents. we'll review the situation and make announcements in that regard when we're ready. for now, its clear our public position is one of strong opposition either to the existence of software patents or to their use to block access to markets by free software developers. in particular, i'm concerned about the chilling effect of patent threats on the willingness of developers to contribute to free software

LoudMouthMan: Mark unlike other distros your far more visible as a figure head (in my opinion ) and therefore you are a target for criticism when you post any comments. How do you feel about that ?

  • Sometimes I wish my feet tasted better. It's particularly difficult in cases where I have very strong personal opinions. the good thing is that this is an open community, so members express their own opinions just as loudly. we have had several ubuntu folks publicly take a different position to me, and i like that

fliegenderfrosch: Were you surprised by the largely negative reactions?

  • I knew it would be controversial, I said as much in the mail

kalon33: What do you think is great in Suse that we haven't in Ubuntu ?

  • I think they have some excellent configuraiton management in YaST that I would like to see in Ubuntu. PPPOE, apparently. also, server side config. contributions welcome Smile :-) for the rest, i haven't ever used it so can't comment

rejden: adding to my previous one, did Canonical made any patents/trademark/copyright (IPR) except the legal trademarks of the names and logos? In EPO (European Patent Office) or in United States. Is Canonical considering applying to make patents in the future? What kind of patents that will be?

  • no, we have never filed for patents, though we often say "gee, this would be a great patent" when we are working on new code. there's a lot in bazaar, from example, that would have been patentable before we released it as GPL, same in LP and of course int he core distro, our livecd approach, ltsp work etc but we have never filed for patents

KHatfull: If Microsoft does pursue IP suits against Linux how would the Linux community be able to defend itself? Would there be enough evidence to support the notion that there's no Microsoft IP currently being distributed?

  • It's quite possible that there is code in Linux which does infringe a Microsoft patent. In general, the response could be threefold.
    • (1) show that Microsoft in turn violates a patent, or more, which is held by a Linux-supporting company, thereby acting as a deterrent (2) Rework the code to avoid the specific terms of the patent (3) Agree to pay patent fees
    Number (3) has issues with some free software licences. We avoid shipping some GPL software, for example, because of patents

popey: Do you feel this deal taints the developers who work for Novell on FLOSS products such as SAMBA?

  • No. I think the developers were entirely out of the loop on this one. There may have been some senior guys who heard about it before the announcement, but I don't think this was a deliberate step from the developer side

KHatfull: If Microsoft decides to pursue IP suits and Ubuntu, as a very high profile distro, becomes a target, how vigorous a defense will you/Canonical be able to mount?

  • We are particularly vulnerable to this. We have no patents with which to mount a deterrent. Nor do we have deep pockets for a protracted lawsuit. That's just how it is. So you can see why I'm very concerned. The same is true of all the distros which aim to be freely available. I'm interested to know how the Microsoft deal relates to OpenSUSE. It's easy to see how a paid product, like SLED, could include the fee to pay Microsoft ("to not sue you") but with a free, community product, it's not possible to collect the fee

corstar: so, would you guys "ever" patent anything(to protect Open source). Or does that go against the FOSS?

  • if we did file patents, we would licence them to GPL implementations, freely.

Nat_: Novell, Red Hat, IBM and others put a lot of resources into funding the Open Invention Network and providing it with patents to use to protect Linux in case someone decides to sue a Linux user or distributor for patent infringement. Will Canonical participate in OIN?

  • We've asked IBM for further details on OIN. We have no patents to contribute, and do not have deep pockets, but it may be that our participation is useful from other perspectives. if so then they may be willing to let us in on terms that would work for us. and then yes, that would be something we could do

tuxub: Mark, do you think that european community has enough strong will to stand up against microsoft patent politics and, maybe in a few years time, make a turn to openly embrace and promote open source usage by european companies?

  • So far so good. I think this will require eternal vigilance, though. since the pressure from IP holders to expand the scope of their property is very high and there is not a strong voice for the commons. however, the free software movement, and now also the creative commons movement, have gained significant mindshare. hopefully, that continues to build

andresmujica: Do you expect that ubuntu evolves as a mainly desktop distro or are you planning to put more effort at server side? Is any chance that SUSE's expertise on KDE would help the kubuntu's development?

  • we are currently hiring both desktop and server developers

amachu: Education sector the real arena where Ubuntu can prove decisive.. Mark, how do compare with Microsoft's educational suites with Edubuntu?

  • I think the best thing that free software does in education is DIVERSITY. we don't (yet) have the best word processor. though we have at least three *pretty good* ones. what we do have is a huge spectrum of tools. for all sorts of disciplines music, art, maths, physics, statistics, programming, design. you name it. and those tools are free of charge and OPEN. you can see how the tools work and you can shape them. that's a treasure chest for education. especially in places where the kids are often smarter than the teachers. so, we should focus on that

oblio: what do you think about mono entering gnome base? after all, it's surely cause for concern at M$\

  • The mono guys have done awesome work. it would be very sad to have that come under a cloud now. at this stage, we have no plans to drop mono because of these concerns. Novell has said that they believe there are no patent issues and we believe that is in good faith

jjtec1: What can we as community do to influence this bad deal?

  • first, i thnk the terms of the deal are not yet set in stone. i suspect there is a lot of activity internally at novell with developers trying to help set things right. add your voice to theirs. speak with opensuse folks and see if you can help them make the case for novell management to take a stronger line. also, watch gpl v3. i hope that this deal does not upset the balance of the v3 discussion. we need v3 to be a balanced licence, not unduly influenced by the issue du jour, but this has certianly thrown the patent question into stark relief

MisterN: is Canonical / Ubuntu actively lobbying against software patents? (i already asked but with wrong case)

  • we have not done enough. individually, canonical folks have always spoken against software patents, but we are not part of a formal lobby group, for example

_MMA_: With IBM's seemingly great support for linux do you think they would do well to jump back into the desktop market? Ubuntu-powered IBM desktop anyone? ;)

  • No, I think IBM is not yet really engaged in the desktop market. for them, the focus remains servers. they sold their desktop PC business (and were very happy to get rid of it). that said, they do have a big global business managing office PC's for other companies. that's where I would expect them to climb in

sjoeboo: mark, You recently blogged a bit about the pros and cons of non-free drivers and codecs, and reasons to include some and not the others. Has a "final" decision been made about non-free drivers from here on out?

  • this is tangential to the opensuse discussion, but it's controversial and topical so... no. no final decision has been made. the discussion is ongoing on ubuntu-devel, forums, blogs, email. i've expressed an opinion, as have other members of the tech board. i think the final position will be a nuanced, careful, clear one. that maintains our commitment to making your hardware work, while still promoting only free software applications. we are unlikely to become gNewSense. nor are we suddenly going to become Mint Linux. our place is in the middle.

07:47   sabdfl  i tihnk that's all the opensuse related questions in -chat
07:48   sabdfl  Nat_ from opensuse is here, i'd like to invite him to speak a bit if he wants the floor
07:48   sabdfl  "you're in a maze of twisty tunnels, all looking the same"
07:48   sabdfl  "Nat_ is here"
07:48   Nat_    You were killed by a grue :-)
07:48   Nat_    Thanks for the invitation to say something, I appreciate that, but I was just hear to lurk and listen :-)
07:48   sabdfl  story of my life :-)
07:49   Nat_    I do think a lot of people misunderstand and blow out of proportion the Novell/MS deal
07:49   Nat_    I can understand why people would be concerned about a partnership with Microsoft, but I guess I'd ask people to look at the situtaion and try to see if there's really a real harm being done.
07:50   Nat_    And if people have questions I'm glad to field those :-)
07:50   Nat_    Here or elsewhere
07:50   Nat_    I'm also on another phone call right now so I'm not really as articulate as, like, I'd want to be
07:50   Nat_    ;-)
07:50   sabdfl  ok, questions for Nat_ in -chat, i'll post here
07:50   Nat_    Thanks :-)

jku_: Nat_, so you disagree with sabdfl about the meaning/importance of the patent-part of the deal? Do you see no ill effects for the free software community?

  • [Nat_] Personally I think we got MS to acknowledge that Linux is real, that it matters; we got a lot of money from them that we can use to continue to subsidize writing free software -- software that shows up in Ubuntu, for example; we didn't violate the GPL and I don't think there's any real harm to any other parties.

KHatfull: (for Nat_) Can you give us the short 3-5 sentence statement on what the Novell/MS deal means to someone iside openSUSE?

  • [Nat_] Microsoft has been making threatening noises about Linux and their patents for years and years, that's nothing new. I think it menas basically nothing for someone inside opensuse, except I hope it means that we get to hire more people to contribute to opensuse. One of the things we asked Microsoft to put in the deal, and which they tried to put in, is a promise never to sue a person for their association with free software. They didn't do a great job of that, but they're going to redraft it and we hope to see something improved at some point soon Smile :-)

LoudMouthMan: NAT_ can you introduce your self and clarify your relationship with OPensuse and Suse/Novell ?

  • [Nat_] Oh, I'm Nat Friedman, I cofounded a company called Ximian in 1999; in 2003 we sold it to Novell; now I'm CTO of the Linux group at Novell. I live in Germany.

    [apokryphos] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Friedman

    Bourlotieris: "No real harm done" - do you believe that Balmer would make the UNACCEPTABLE announcement he did a few days ago if there was no deal with Novell? [Nat_] Well, first I agree that Ballmer's statements were totally unacceptable and our CEO published an open letter in which he said the same thing. But, it doesn't take a lot of google searching to determine that he's been saying approximately those same things for years and years, independent of any dealings with Novell. So, yes, I think he would have been saying that stuff anyway. Novell is not released. Microsoft could sue Novell at any time, that's not prohibited in the contract. We would be protected by our own patent portfolio (which we could use to sue Microsoft back) and by OIN, which we helped create. If you don't know OIN -- check out www.openinventionnetwork.com. it's a company that pools patents and uses them to protect Linux. so if someone sues Canonical, or Red Hat, or Debian, over a Linux-related patent infringement, OIN will sue them back. Novell helped OIN get all of the patents they have today.Novell didn't actually need that protection itself (becuase we already had ~400 patents)... but we did it anyway

07:57   Nat_    thanks for the chance :-)
07:57   sabdfl  Best news I've had all day :-)
07:57   sabdfl  Ok, thanks very much Nat_
07:57   sabdfl  yer welcome
07:58   sabdfl  in closing
07:58   sabdfl  i do want to apologise to anyone offended by my direct invitation to opensuse devs
07:58   sabdfl  i don't in any way believe that opensuse devs had any malicious intent in the novell deal
07:59   sabdfl  and i do believe that the devs are likely helping, behind the scenes, to straighten things out
07:59   sabdfl  thanks to Nat_ for shedding some light on that process

MeetingLogs/openweekedgy/OpenSuSEInvite (last edited 2008-08-06 16:24:49 by localhost)