Collaborating as a team or group for Puppy good

News, happenings
Message
Author
jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#101 Post by jpeps »

There are so many great open source projects underway. Here's a link to the eclipse developmental process:

http://www.eclipse.org/projects/dev_pro ... Engagement

2.1 Open Source Rules of Engagement

Open - Eclipse is open to all; Eclipse provides the same opportunity to all. Everyone participates with the same rules; there are no rules to exclude any potential contributors which include, of course, direct competitors in the marketplace.
Transparent - Project discussions, minutes, deliberations, project plans, plans for new features, and other artifacts are open, public, and easily accessible.
Meritocracy - Eclipse is a meritocracy. The more you contribute the more responsibility you will earn. Leadership roles in Eclipse are also merit-based and earned by peer acclaim.

gcmartin

#102 Post by gcmartin »

Thanks@Q5sys and @JPeps

What appears to be happening here is to determine what would work in this community, given the mindset and talent this community has. And to attempt to define a structure that would be attractive and comfortable. With these ideas engulfed, the next step is to make a step with something that the community can rallye around. We are now at just the ideas stage, but, we are approaching something that might be a launch stage.

This would be a specific PUPPY creation. And, as one can see, it will be pioneering effort, unseen as yet, and on a bit of a larger scale with a larger community of persons using today's technology. as we create something. The intent for this to be a very very easy collective (please no more comments about language nuances or political defamations. We are just trying to envision how to easily work together.) And to see if whether we can envision, model and test.

As has been demonstrated by the contributions in this thread, all are finding this an idea to ponder.

Here to help

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#103 Post by jpeps »

gcmartin wrote:Thanks@Q5sys and @JPeps

What appears to be happening here is to determine what would work in this community, given the mindset and talent this community has.
My point in posting was that linux projects don't require some radical shift in ideology in order to function correctly, as you insinuate. Also, note the statement regarding "meritocracy." People that don't contribute acquire zero status in the pecking order, and virtually all development is achieved by a few individuals, as noted in their project reports.

http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project ... .tmf.xtext

gcmartin: your posting style is like a bad group therapy experience, where the leader interprets what he/she thinks (in his/her infinite wisdom) the other group members are doing.

User avatar
Smithy
Posts: 1151
Joined: Mon 12 Dec 2011, 11:17

#104 Post by Smithy »

Was having a look at Zigbert's PMusic Language thread:

http://208.109.22.214/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=
36842&sid=35c6d54ba9d7044ec1131c3eddfd9637

To me, this looks like a great example of people collaborating from all over the world (using BK Mo Manager, the man's a dynamo) for Puppy good.

Suppose if you were building a Puppy from scratch, one might be best to use some benchmarks of what areas of the OS have been successful in the past, and what needs sorting.

Like combining Uncle Jack and Aunty Alsa and Lord Wineasio into one speaker icon+right click menu on the desktop with a slider for low latency (high cpu use) to high latency (low cpu use). At least that would be three less things that one had to tweak about with. Some kind of streamlined audio subsystem. It's a bit too much like LEGO at the moment (imo).

I should imagine that would be a massive project in itself, and might seem like a waste of time compared to other aspects of Puppy that developers may be more concerned about. (Of which I know not)

Collabs just happen I guess, and hopefully the fruits are kept and the knowledge added to improve on what has gone before.
Not talking about weapons building here tho', purely fun and open source.

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#105 Post by Q5sys »

jpeps wrote:gcmartin: your posting style is like a bad group therapy experience, where the leader interprets what he/she thinks (in his/her infinite wisdom) the other group members are doing.
Ya know... at first when I read that my response was 'damn thats harsh'. But then after a few minutes of it rolling around in my head I went back and re-read some of his older posts... now that you mention it... it pretty much is like every group therapy session Ive ever seen in a movie.
Shall we dub GCmartin the PL community group therapist? lol Afterall he does end every post with "here to help".

gcmartin

#106 Post by gcmartin »

Looking at creating something (a collaboration approach) is not therapy. Is it? Without getting too far off, does trying to refine ideas and thoughts mean we are in therapy?

Hopefully we learned something that tweaked our look at this. Hoping...

Here to help

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#107 Post by Q5sys »

gcmartin wrote:Looking at creating something (a collaboration approach) is not therapy. Is it? Without getting too far off, does trying to refine ideas and thoughts mean we are in therapy?

Hopefully we learned something that tweaked our look at this. Hoping...

Here to help
I think you missed the point of what he was saying...
gcmartin wrote:Hopefully we learned something that tweaked our look at this.
You are talking in the 2nd person plural. You keep talking as if 'YOU' are 'WE'. Thats pretty much the cliche group therapy thing, or elementary school teacher line...
"Now class, what have we learned today?"

I dont know if thats just your personal style of talking or what... but it can be kinda freaking annoying. Talk about yourself, talk about what you have taken from this thread and ask what the rest of us have taken from this. You and I are distinct entities. Please do not lump me in with you and everyone else. "We" are not some borg collective that has a mutual goal and drive.
If you want talk about your thoughts... make it clear they are yours. If you want to talk about what you hope I may have gotten from something, thats fine too.
Perhaps its not your intention, but it comes across as very passive agressive. Most of your comments are about a collective "We" or "Community".
Everytime you ask a dev for something its always because, "it will help the community" or "we need this".
Can you please stop trying to talk for everyone? You have your voice, stand up for what you think and feel. respect everyone else to let them stand up for what they think and feel.

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#108 Post by jpeps »

gcmartin wrote:Looking at creating something (a collaboration approach) is not therapy. Is it? Without getting too far off, does trying to refine ideas and thoughts mean we are in therapy?

Hopefully we learned something that tweaked our look at this. Hoping...

Here to help
I don't know about "we", but obviously you're not learning anything.

gcmartin

#109 Post by gcmartin »

"Collaborating ..." somehow wouldn't that be a "we" .... Further, the ideas that many have contributed here, collectively, is a "we" in this thread. If you feel that you were NOT a part of the thread, then I sorry, but you were one of us....thus "we". In its own way, this thread can be thought of as a kind of collaboration, although it would not meet the strict interpretation.

That's neither double-talk or partial or personal. This topic is being moved in the wrong direction. Its intention is NOT to annoy anyone of "us" (that's we or a wei or ...).

If we should venture toward something should it have a means to provide a "vent" tank for those who have an expressed need to use it? This, can be a useful area in a collaboration, as well.

Great interaction as it also give clues on needs that should be included in a model. It may not be obvious, but "we" are learning thru the interactions we, indeed, are having here, for example, a need for a vent tank, maybe.

Thanks for any of your cooperation. Those specific comments are helpful in there own way.
Envisioning a model, defining it, structuring it would allow the last step...a project. It would be hoped to be obvious and transparent.

Here to help

User avatar
darkcity
Posts: 2534
Joined: Sun 23 May 2010, 19:16
Location: near here
Contact:

#110 Post by darkcity »

Puppy ES bug tracker-
http://bugs.puppyes.com.ar/

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#111 Post by Q5sys »

gcmartin wrote:"Collaborating ..." somehow wouldn't that be a "we" .... Further, the ideas that many have contributed here, collectively, is a "we" in this thread. If you feel that you were NOT a part of the thread, then I sorry, but you were one of us....thus "we". In its own way, this thread can be thought of as a kind of collaboration, although it would not meet the strict interpretation.

That's neither double-talk or partial or personal. This topic is being moved in the wrong direction. Its intention is NOT to annoy anyone of "us" (that's we or a wei or ...).
As I said in my previous post, I dont know if its your personal writing style or not. But there is a major difference between:
Talking about the community ('we' as a group)
Talking for the community ('we' as a group)

The way you write it sounds more like the 2nd than the 1st. That is where my comments are coming from. The way you have been talking it comes across like you have ordained yourself the community representative and are talking on our behalf. The reason I mention this to you, is so you can be aware of it. If its not intended... it might explain why myself and perhaps others are irked by the tone that you take. Its a common human response to not give credence to a message when we dont like how the message is being promoted.

As for where to go... As has been suggested, people need to figure out what they want in a release and then find devs who are willing to work on it. Will anyone take that step?

User avatar
RSH
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon 05 Sep 2011, 14:21
Location: Germany

#112 Post by RSH »

"A Little Less Conversation" has been used in several political campaigns as a message of more accomplishment and less talk.

Might help here also. So: "A Little Less Conversation" and a little more action, please. :lol:

Remember the King?

Edit:

I did collaborate now for about the last 8 or 9 months with a user/forum-member in the german forum for the good of LazY Puppy. Successful, I would like to say.

It's hard! But for its result, it's also good!
Last edited by RSH on Mon 24 Dec 2012, 01:47, edited 1 time in total.
[b][url=http://lazy-puppy.weebly.com]LazY Puppy[/url][/b]
[b][url=http://rshs-dna.weebly.com]RSH's DNA[/url][/b]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=91422][b]SARA B.[/b][/url]


User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#114 Post by Q5sys »

RSH wrote:"A Little Less Conversation" has been used in several political campaigns as a message of more accomplishment and less talk.

Might help here also. So: "A Little Less Conversation" and a little more action, please. :lol:

Remember the King?

Edit:

I do collaborate now for about 8 or 9 months with a user/forum-member in the german forum for the good of LazY Puppy. Successful, I would like to say.

It's hard! But for its result, it's also good!
Good luck with that. The 'we must collaborate' crowd seems to always be talk and no action. As shown by the lack of any one of them stepping forward to lead a community project

User avatar
RSH
Posts: 2397
Joined: Mon 05 Sep 2011, 14:21
Location: Germany

#115 Post by RSH »

Q5sys wrote:Good luck with that.
Hi Qsys.

I'm sorry, but I made some wrong translations. I meant: I did collaborate now for about the last 8 or 9 months... (post above edited).

RSH
[b][url=http://lazy-puppy.weebly.com]LazY Puppy[/url][/b]
[b][url=http://rshs-dna.weebly.com]RSH's DNA[/url][/b]
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=91422][b]SARA B.[/b][/url]

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#116 Post by Q5sys »

RSH wrote:
Q5sys wrote:Good luck with that.
Hi Qsys.

I'm sorry, but I made some wrong translations. I meant: I did collaborate now for about the last 8 or 9 months... (post above edited).

RSH
The "good luck with that" comment was in refernce to getting people to do more than just talk. I was referring to those that love to talk over and over in this thread and others about 'collaboration' yet never do more than continue to talk about it. Or those who reference work others have done... as if them linking to others work means they are doing something worthwhile.

I've kept an eye on your Lazypup thread for the ideas you've been incorporating. So yea... wasnt talking about you.

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#117 Post by jpeps »

Q5sys wrote: ... as if them linking to others work means they are doing something worthwhile.
.
Q5sys: It's difficult for mere technicians to understand those who have evolved beyond the personal pronoun. The cure for all lowly technicians is to get back to work churning out more useless code. Presently "I'm" punching out some Java apps....what could be more useless than that?

User avatar
greengeek
Posts: 5789
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010, 09:34
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

#118 Post by greengeek »

Mediafire looks like they have a new facility for online collaboration, called Mediafire Express. Maybe similar to Google Docs? I wonder if, being a paid service, it may be more secure?

http://www.mediafire.com/software/express/tour.php

gcmartin

SlackoBones - a collaboration

#119 Post by gcmartin »

Here's an active example collaboration project involving 3 community members for a common effort: Namely @JamesBond, @Meeki, and @Q5sys.

I'm sure they can contribute what they used and how they were able to derive success in how they collaborate. Thus, their process will reflect one "model" of collaborating.

Here to help

User avatar
Q5sys
Posts: 1105
Joined: Thu 11 Dec 2008, 19:49
Contact:

#120 Post by Q5sys »

greengeek wrote:Mediafire looks like they have a new facility for online collaboration, called Mediafire Express. Maybe similar to Google Docs? I wonder if, being a paid service, it may be more secure?

http://www.mediafire.com/software/express/tour.php
What Im about to say is not an attack against you... it is merely a comment on the act of posting about tools.
Collarboration does not require a million tools. It doesnt require some new fangled software. What it requires is for people to work together. Let me give an example. You can take an untrained person and stick them into a complete mechanics shop and give them the opportunity to work on a car... and nothing will get done. Why? Because it doesnt matter how many tools they have, if they dont have the knowledge to use them... or if they dont even know what work even needs to be done.
Having tools is great, but only if you A) know how to use them, and B) actually will use them. Tools sitting in a toolbox wont do a thing if no one wants to actually do any work.

Which leads me directly into the next post:
gcmartin wrote:Here's an active example collaboration project involving 3 community members for a common effort: Namely @JamesBond, @Meeki, and @Q5sys.

I'm sure they can contribute what they used and how they were able to derive success in how they collaborate. Thus, their process will reflect one "model" of collaborating.

Here to help
Want to know how we collaborated... its really simple. I sent JamesBond a PM and asked him for some advice in what I wanted to do, since he had already gone down that road. After talking back and forth a bit we figured out the best way to proceed and then we did.

But let me back up a bit. Let me explain where that project came from.
Probably about 3 years ago (maybe even longer) someone released a super slim 32bit puppy that was a good base if you wanted to make your own release. I forget who it was at the time, but I loved it. It allowed me to take a complete barebones system and test and play around and completely screw things up... but it gave me a playground to learn. I had to do make the effort, I had to try things out, I had to actually do some work... but it allowed me to learn more than just asking someone else to do the work for me. Someone else gave me the tool... I had to apply that tool and put for the effort to use it.

Well I've gotten strictly into 64bit now... so I've wanted a base 64bit system , to be able to do the same thing with. With the computer I have right now, and the one Im going to building... I need 64 bit. I just cant get by with 32.
I had been hoping someone would make something like this, but really there have only been 3 64bit devs in the community, Kirk, Jamesbond, and TazOC. I could have sat around and posted in peoples threads asking for them to do it, I could have pestered people for months trying to play mental games to try to get them to do what I wanted. But that's not my style. Here in is an example of a 'Do-acracy'. (for those that dont know what a doacracy is; its an organizational structure in which people choose roles and tasks for themselves and then do them. Responsibilities attach to those who do the work, rather than elected positions or other people who are stand-byers)
I wanted this... so I decided to make it happen. I wanted the tool... but in this case I had to put forth the effort to make it.
I realized the task of building this release was going to fall on me. So I tried my hand numerous times at trying to make wolf work for 64bit, and kept failing. After a dozen or so failed attempts I gave JamesBond a shout out and asked him for some pointers.
After explaining my thoughts and ideas, he said he could help. He was already doing some of the work for a future Fatdog release, so there was no reason for us to double efforts. He did what he was could do easily with his planned work, and I'd pick up the ball from there and take it the rest of the way.
Meeki and I have been doing development for TazOC in the LightHouse Thread, so we've been talking back and forth about other things. When I mentioned this project he loved the idea and wanted to know if he could pitch in and help where he was able. He wanted to get his hands dirty and learn more about Puppy.

So all 3 of the main people involved in slackbones, Myself, JamesBond, and Meeki; all decided to take the step and put forth the effort. Talking about it over and over in threads, taking surveys, trying to see what others would think of the idea... no we didnt do any of that. We sat our butts down and actually did some work.

Thats how things get done. They dont get done by having a focus group (anyone who's dealt with corperate america knows how much of a joke those can be). Things get done when people decided to start working on something.

So for everyone saying 'we need to collaborate'. What we need is less people saying we need to collaborate, and more people actually willing to do some work. It doesnt have to be coding work, there is a TON of work to be done around the Puppy Linux Community that no one is doing.
The coders and devs need to do what they do best... Code and Dev. Those who want to help but cant code and dev... just pick a project and ask what you can do to help.

Post Reply