Replacing openSUSE Leap
ALP is, by design, an amorphous project; it is intended to facilitate the creation of focused distributions for a number of different use cases. The initial targets appear to be server workloads, with a focus on containers and confidential-computing uses. While it is somewhat hard to get a grasp on what future SUSE products will look like, the company does not appear to be heading toward the creation of another traditional enterprise distribution as part of the ALP transition.
Rolling slowly
This change poses both a challenge and an opportunity for the openSUSE project. The loss of the existing base means that it will not be possible to continue to create Leap in its current form, but the flexibility of ALP means that a number of options may open up in the future. Before pursuing one or more of those options, though, the community must decide what it wants to do — and what it has the resources to do. To that end, a survey of openSUSE users and contributors was recently run; the results have been posted, as has an analysis of those results by Richard Brown. The latter has sparked the beginning of what may be a long conversation in the openSUSE community.
The results are somewhat ambiguous. On the one hand, there seems to be a significant portion of the community that would prefer to keep Leap going in something close to its current form. On the other, though, there is also a lot of interest in rolling distributions, which are almost the opposite of how the core of Leap is managed. Respondents were asked about two possible distributions that the community could create to take Leap's place:
- "Linarite" would be "
a regular old fashioned release desktop distribution
", though with a smaller package selection than is provided by Leap now. It would be based on a SUSE project known as "Granite"; there is little public information available regarding this project, but it seems to be the ALP-derived product that will be the closest to a traditional enterprise server distribution. - "Slowroll", instead, is a rolling distribution based on the existing
openSUSE Tumbleweed
offering (which is not built on enterprise packages and can be
expected to continue without big changes), but with a stronger focus
on stability. Packages would move from Tumbleweed to Slowroll when
they have shown, over a period of time, that they are unlikely to
introduce new problems. Slowroll, Brown said, is "
an attempt to provide something less scary than full speed Tumbleweed
".
After looking at the survey responses, Brown came to a few conclusions
regarding where, in his opinion, the openSUSE community should focus its
efforts. By his reading, the respondents "overwhelmingly
" support
rolling releases; as a result, he said, any Leap replacement should look
like Slowroll rather than Linarite. "It is the most popular with our
users, and the option more closely aligned to what our contributors use
themselves.
"
Beyond that, he said, openSUSE should focus firmly on desktop use cases
rather than trying to build something that might be suitable for server
deployments as well. Given that openSUSE will be able to package and ship
its own copies of the SUSE products coming out of ALP, and those products
will "be awesome for folk who want Enterprise-like server distros
",
Brown does not see much point in openSUSE expending its resources in that
direction. Instead, since SUSE has little interest in the desktop area at
this point, that is where openSUSE can make a real contribution.
An openSUSE Slowroll can only work, though, if the community can pull
together the resources to build it, and Brown is "concerned that we do
not have enough contributors to make any Leap replacement viable
".
Creating and maintaining Slowroll would require more resources than the
current Leap effort, and he is not convinced that those resources will be
available.
Michal Suchánek questioned the idea that building and maintaining Slowroll would require more work, given that it would mostly just pull packages from the existing Tumbleweed distribution. Brown answered that it would require a lot of work that is not being done (by the openSUSE community, at least) now:
Because, unlike Leap where maintenance for SLE packages is effectively 'automatic' (ie. taken care as part of the daily business of SLE), and unlike Tumbleweed where it's also effectively 'automatic' ('just throw a new version at it), Slowroll will likely require old-fashioned maintenance (CVE bumps, backports, narrow-fixes) for packages in Slowroll but not-yet-ready to be copied from Tumbleweed.
If the project is going to do Slowroll at all, he added, it needs to do the job properly so that it is truly a more secure and stable offering than Tumbleweed.
Matěj Cepl, instead, suggested that ALP might be Slowroll, and that openSUSE could have it for free. Brown's response was that, if ALP ends up producing a rolling release at all, it will advance at a rather slower rate than the community would like. Slowroll, he said, is an opportunity to create a rolling release that rolls at a speed chosen by the openSUSE community.
Taking Leap for Granite
Not everybody in the community has given up on continuing to produce a distribution that, even if it is not Leap, would have many of the same characteristics as Leap. Simon Lees expressed interest in building such a distribution on top of SUSE's Granite, whatever that turns out to be. Brown pointed out that Granite is not planned for release before 2025; given that there is currently no plan within openSUSE to create a Leap 15.7 release, basing a successor on Granite would likely leave Leap users without a supported alternative for at least a year. Lees, though, is convinced that a Granite-based Leap replacement is a viable option, and seems determined to prove it as Granite takes shape:
Well i'm the sort of person that will take the goal of having a distro based on Granite before the end of 15.6 and push my hardest to resolve the issues to get there and if come September / October 2025 that is looking unlikely i'd start to look at temporary workarounds to bridge the gap.
Suchánek asked
why there was no Leap 15.7 release planned; Brown answered
that creating that release would take resources — specifically the SUSE
developers tasked to work on openSUSE — away from helping with a Leap
replacement. He later added
that: "if I were to persuade SUSE to sponsor the work for a 15.7, that
15.7 will not just be the last Leap release, but we'll almost certainly
have no replacement going forward
". That, he said,
would be the end of a stable, desktop-oriented openSUSE release:
openSUSE Leap is a very Desktop-centric distribution.None of SUSE's planned ALP products have any intention of being a Desktop-centric offering.
If openSUSE doesn't start the work now, then ALP will never be ready for the Desktop use cases we currently enjoy with Leap.
In April, Brown had looked at where ALP was headed and concluded
that "if we the community want to build something like old Leap, that
should be totally technically feasible
". Now, though, he seems to be
arguing that openSUSE only has one viable option, Slowroll, going forward.
Lees, instead, appears to still be in favor of doing something more along
the lines of an "old Leap
" with an upcoming ALP product as the base.
What the community as a whole feels is the best approach is yet to be
determined.
It is clearly an important decision point for one of the oldest existing
Linux distributions. Perhaps openSUSE's biggest problem, though, is one
that only appeared at the edges of this conversation: how can the project
attract more contributors so that its options might be less limited in the
future? According to Brown's initial message, only 61 people contributed
to the last Leap release. Without people to do the work, the direction
that openSUSE would like to go will only be so relevant.
Posted Sep 8, 2023 8:56 UTC (Fri)
by smcv (subscriber, #53363)
[Link] (3 responses)
Prior art for this: Debian 'testing' (the branch where the next stable Debian release is prepared) has this design, with 'unstable' (the branch that maintainers upload new packages into) as the equivalent of Tumbleweed. That's great, up to a point...
> would require a lot of work that is not being done (by the openSUSE community, at least) now
... but unfortunately, Debian also has prior art for this problem: the major problem with using 'testing' as a desktop distribution is that it has no direct security support. CVE fixes and other targeted bug fixes are done in 'unstable' and migrate to 'testing' in the same way as any other change, but if there is a big transition happening in unstable, that migration can be delayed by several days or even weeks by what is happening in adjacent packages (if the fixed version of a package with a CVE gets compiled against a new library that isn't ready to migrate due to some unrelated regression, then the fixed version often can't migrate either).
In theory maintainers can do urgent targeted bug fixes by uploading to 'testing-proposed-updates', but using t-p-u requires release team approval which they are cautious about giving, because it gets no real-world testing - there is basically nobody who runs packages in that suite, so any regressions in those packages are only discovered when they get into 'testing', by which time it's too late to avoid those regressions being seen by end users.
I hope openSUSE can overcome the resource problems with this (and if they can, their approaches will likely be interesting for Debian too). Good luck!
Posted Sep 8, 2023 10:52 UTC (Fri)
by Wol (subscriber, #4433)
[Link] (1 responses)
Basically, its primary purpose is (a) to be empty as much as possible, and (b) to fast-track packages from Tumbleweed into Slowroll. Basically, all urgent fixes go in there, and you hopefully have enough people using it to know that problems are likely to surface quickly.
Yes, it's a little more work, but you could even make it part of your release strategy - all planned upgrades dump a group of related packages into FastRoll, test them for a week or two to look for problems, and then promote them to Slowroll. Any packages that spend more than said week or two in FastRoll get dumped out as "not ready for release".
Cheers,
Posted Sep 23, 2023 9:57 UTC (Sat)
by roblucid (guest, #48964)
[Link]
It's more like Debian unstable Sid, where package maintainers submitting updates are aware that there's a vocal user base whose systems they could be breaking. For packages to go into Tumbleweed, they might be batched together with dependencie protecting against inclusion with incompatible libraries.
Posted Sep 11, 2023 11:26 UTC (Mon)
by bmwiedemann (subscriber, #71319)
[Link]
Occasionally there will be source-level incompatibilities (e.g. using a new rpm macro) where we either have to spend the time to resolve it or bump the base repo to the latest Tumbleweed to have everything in sync again - at the expense of more updates for users.
Posted Sep 8, 2023 9:45 UTC (Fri)
by eru (subscriber, #2753)
[Link] (4 responses)
Posted Sep 8, 2023 15:16 UTC (Fri)
by smoogen (subscriber, #97)
[Link]
Usually the discussions over this get incredibly heated because most of the items are subjective decision points. Most of those heated discussions come up in other areas, and when you have a small number of participants who have known each other for decades.. it is better to just avoid the unresolvable and present what might be generally accepted.
Posted Sep 10, 2023 20:56 UTC (Sun)
by Conan_Kudo (subscriber, #103240)
[Link]
Posted Sep 11, 2023 11:16 UTC (Mon)
by bmwiedemann (subscriber, #71319)
[Link]
Posted Sep 23, 2023 9:40 UTC (Sat)
by roblucid (guest, #48964)
[Link]
Previously I had to bastardise my base release by including a growing number of repositories, that included distro specific changes to upstream development. At times I was hit by regressions, discovered far too late; developers re-developing do have a tendency to deliver partial implementations and years later when their code eventaually reaches a distro they'll reject bug reports about something they thought they could drop and now the code is cold and unfamiliar, defective by design because it's something not used by developer peer groups. That lead to me having to replace hardware on 2 occasions.
Tumbleweed has no mechanism to say it's "stable" and snap shot worthy, freezing a state just creates a load of maintenance work deciding what fixes have to be patched into the base code. Nobody upstream is testing vs your distro, you'd be creating flag days for switches that needs lots of people to test. In my experience, Tumbleweed was NOT breaking the whole time, contrary to the fears of frozen release advocates. Packages have to be tested
Slowroll is a far better idea, lets Tumbleweed users demand fixes if an engineer releases a broken package into it, while avoiding admin & work creation schemes of curating, what is supposed to be an improved code base by the work of developers and QA. Anybody who tracks Tumbleweed and uses the applications or uses upstream packages and reports bugs is contributing to the correctness of Slowroll.
Posted Sep 11, 2023 14:59 UTC (Mon)
by ber (subscriber, #2142)
[Link] (1 responses)
It seems SUSE is not interested in offering something like this. And just relying on volunteers is creating the resource challenges and this will only get worse.
Posted Sep 23, 2023 10:24 UTC (Sat)
by roblucid (guest, #48964)
[Link]
The article is about the impact of SLES ceasing in favour of apparently data centre & edge commercial deployments, that left Leap without the SLES base that it was layered on.
Posted Sep 12, 2023 6:42 UTC (Tue)
by ber (subscriber, #2142)
[Link]
Replacing openSUSE Leap
...
> Slowroll will likely require old-fashioned maintenance (CVE bumps, backports, narrow-fixes) for packages in Slowroll but not-yet-ready to be copied from Tumbleweed
Replacing openSUSE Leap
Wol
Replacing openSUSE Leap
The SuSE development repository could have "in progress" broken packages checked in and had to be stabilised and fixed prior to release.
Replacing openSUSE Leap
Replacing openSUSE Leap
Replacing openSUSE Leap
1. What does 'stabilized' mean? [You usually end up with people spending more time arguing over what that means and who gets to judge it than people actually testing for said 'stability'.]
2. Who is going to do the testing work to say something is stable?
3. What gets put into the pile of 'we care it is stable' and 'we don't care it is stable'?
4. Who is going to possibly backport fixes which need to be done versus boiling the ocean for a complete upgrade of a software stack.
That is what Slowroll is.
Replacing openSUSE Leap
Replacing openSUSE Leap
There are also security fixes in newer versions that never get a CVE because nobody realized that "refactor foo" elimitated a severe vulnerability.
Replacing openSUSE Leap
against something for something to be included, so you have both upstream and a distro package contributor testing the update.
Where is the economic model for OpenSuse?
Where is the economic model for OpenSuse?
As such OpenSuSE is reliant on facilities provided by the company providing the distro, justified as a free intro into SuSE.
SuSE built many very flexible tools that allowed tailored install image creation and building packages for distribution for other distros.
SLE going away, also the SLE Desktop?