There's a mountain to climb: openSUSE's response to SUSE ALP
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Meeting notes from the ALP Architecture Meeting on June 27, 2023, can be found at etherpad.opens...
Subscribe ►bit.ly/1G2KKZl
Official Website ►www.opensuse.org
Follow us on Twitter ► / opensuse
Like us on Facebook ► / en.opensuse
Especially in light of IBM/RH's recent decisions, I really do appreciate SUSE's dedication to the community.
It's interesting to see some of the trends we've seen in desktop Linux be adopted in an enterprise distro. I think most of the criticism comes from fear of change (i'm sure some criticism is more legitimate, but most of what i've seen has been pretty transparently fear of c he ange).
I have an unpopular opinion: I don't think we need a "NewLeap." In my opinion, when it comes to the desktop space, those who enjoy customizing their system are better off with Tumbleweed, while those who prefer a stable system where everything works smoothly are better served by a variation of MicroOS Desktop. I believe that people who truly want the(LTS experience are more likely to need it on the server rather than the desktop. In that case, a openSUSE version of the "new SLE" would suffice.
You're not the only one to express such an opinion - someone in the Q&A after this recording said pretty much the same. I'm certainly sympathetic to your view and wouldn't object if it becomes the consensus, but I also think its important to give an opportunity for those who feel differently to express their view through contributions :)
have you guys thought about doing the freeBSD separation of the CORE OS and the LOCAL USER by folder hierarchy this is a surprisingly good idea for making systems like LEGO and combined with YaST sounds like it would lower technical debt... let me know if this is too much of a radical idea... I'm not a expert in this.
I tend to agree with this. I am running Tumbleweed on all my desktops (less one because I like to test) and even my server without any issues. I feel like Tumbleweed has the maturity to just be the thing to use at this point. The only issue I see is the integration of zypper with packagekit for doing updates graphically.
looking really good, hope there will be some newleap desktop version
Desktops need to be at least semi rolling, you need latest stable kernel, drivers, mesa or newer h/w may not work/work as well as it could.
There is Arch and others on a rolling release model.
I prefer LTS, especially for the Linux version.
ALP is forcing BTRFS on everyone - the complexity to fix things will cause users to abandon it for Tumbleweed.
As far as ALP being more secure - I bet within 6 weeks hackers will figure out how to get around the security.
This project is fine for Large Corporations that have Computer Farms but I wonder if it is another idea that Corporate IT thinks they want but will abandon after they see it.
I can see why SAP would want it as it provides accountability that they need for their product. It will fail for many applications that have to communicate between applications.
In the 1980's I was on a team that built a secure UNIX - it failed because applications like Oracle could not run. The email application had to have a separate copy for each user. Memory ran out before everyone could sign in.
I see ALP as another "secure UNIX" that will fail. - BTRFS is not a backup - it is a rollback. Storage failure is inevitable, yet they wonder where my data went when the hard drive, SSD or NVME kicks the bucket.
Good computer practices cannot be bypassed - I don't need backup - I have rollbacks - bad idea.
is there any better audio? very poor. th