(OLD) (ARCHIVED) Puppy Linux Discussion Forum :: View topic

(OLD) (ARCHIVED) Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info

This forum can also be accessed as http://oldforum.puppylinux.com
It is now read-only and serves only as archives.

Please register over the NEW forum https://forum.puppylinux.com
and continue your work there. Thank you.

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

The time now is Mon 25 Jan 2021, 16:57
All times are UTC - 4

Forum index » House Training » Users ( For the regulars )

PPM2
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.

This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

View previous topic :: View next topic

Page 7 of 18 [262 Posts]

Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ..., 16, 17, 18 Next

Author

Message

666philb

Joined: 07 Feb 2010
Posts: 3635
Location: wales ... by the sea

Posted: Mon 23 Feb 2015, 13:27 Post subject:

Robin2 wrote:

mavrothal wrote:

I'm afraid Ziggy (and many others including myself) thinks other wise.

I have glanced through the subsequent discussions in this Thread and they all seem to fall into the same category as my "complaint".

If people want to make new versions of programs they are free to do so. But the new versions should not automatically be included with updates to the underlying operating system. User's should not be forced to use new versions of programs.

...R

hi Robin2,

it was my decision to include it as an update, firstly because it's a vast improvement on the old PPM and secondly because tahrpup 6.0 and 6.0.2 now share the same updates and i needed to bring tahrpup 6.0 to the same level as 6.0.2 to stop things getting complicated.

most users are enjoying the update mechanisms in tahrpup, previously updating in puppyland would mean searching through a huge thread looking for specific bug fixes or burning a brand new iso.

i do respect that updates shouldn't make drastic changes, but i felt that the PPM update was both important, useful and also necessary if users of 6.0 were still going to be supported alongside the new 6.0.2 users.
_________________
Bionicpup64 built with bionic beaver packages http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=114311
Xenialpup64, built with xenial xerus packages http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=107331

bigpup

Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 13981
Location: S.C. USA

Posted: Mon 23 Feb 2015, 20:19 Post subject:

Quote:

User's should not be forced to use new versions of programs.

I guess if they want to keep using a program that has problems and bugs in it, your statement would be correct.

Barry K was the one who controlled development of PPM and even he made changes to it over the years.
Why?
Because the changes where needed to make it more functional.

mavrothal has taken on the job of fixing what is wrong with PPM.
In the process he has added some needed features and improvements.
Puppy has evolved and changed.
The core programs need to adapt to those changes.

He at least gives you the option to make PPM work as basically as it always has.

Go to config->Options and make PPM look and operate the way you want it to.

Any good program should allow you to have options.
_________________
The things they do not tell you, are usually the clue to solving the problem.
When I was a kid I wanted to be older.... This is not what I expected Shocked

YaPI(any iso installer)

mavrothal

Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 3108

Posted: Tue 24 Feb 2015, 00:34 Post subject:

Robin2 wrote:

mavrothal wrote:

I'm afraid Ziggy (and many others including myself) thinks other wise.

I have a hard time understanding the "complains" since there is no functionality removed from the original PPM.
There is nothing that PPM was doing and PPM2 can not do in the exact same way.
Functionality has been added but nothing removed.
What may have changed is the default appearance and behaviour, but that is normal for any program that evolves.
_________________
== Here is how to solve your Linux problems fast ==

Robin2

Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Posts: 180

Posted: Tue 24 Feb 2015, 14:13 Post subject:

Let me try to respond to a few comments that seem to me to be related

666philb

Quote:

it was my decision to include it as an update, firstly because it's a vast improvement on the old PPM and secondly because tahrpup 6.0 and 6.0.2 now share the same updates and i needed to bring tahrpup 6.0 to the same level as 6.0.2 to stop things getting complicated.

I do understand the problem of not having resources to maintain 2 different versions. However I think my preference would be to "fix" without changing.

bigpup

Quote:

I guess if they want to keep using a program that has problems and bugs in it, your statement would be correct.

I see no reason why the user experience for software has to be changed to deal with a bug - unless the bug is in the UI, of course.

marothval

Quote:

What may have changed is the default appearance and behaviour, but that is normal for any program that evolves.

This is the part I don't want to be changed without me agreeing to it. Improving the background behaviour is perfectly OK.

I won't say any more about this - I suspect I am in a small minority.

...R

mavrothal

Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 3108

Posted: Tue 24 Feb 2015, 18:27 Post subject:

Robin2 wrote:

marothval

Quote:

What may have changed is the default appearance and behaviour, but that is normal for any program that evolves.

This is the part I don't want to be changed without me agreeing to it. Improving the background behaviour is perfectly OK.

I won't say any more about this - I suspect I am in a small minority.

Apparently what you really want is not the info, or the functionality or anything else but just the old Ziggy_ui, and nothing else will do.
It would appear that for your, 6 is the only number of clicks acceptable to install a package and 3, to uninstall it. Any other combination is unacceptable. And actually is more than that, is a bug!

So, specially for you, download the attached expand it make sure is executable and replace /usr/local/petget/ui_Classic with it.
Check the PPM2 configuration option to use the non-auto interface, and next time you start PPM you get the interface that apparently can not live without.

Please (you or anybody else) do not report any problems related to it. At least not here and not to me. Let's finish this story here.

ui_Classic.gz
Description		Download
Filename	ui_Classic.gz
Filesize	3.06 KB
Downloaded	241 Time(s)

_________________
== Here is how to solve your Linux problems fast ==

Robin2

Joined: 17 Jan 2015
Posts: 180

Posted: Wed 25 Feb 2015, 14:40 Post subject:

mavrothal wrote:

So, specially for you, download the attached expand it make sure is executable and replace /usr/local/petget/ui_Classic with it.

Thank you for taking some trouble on my behalf.

However this misses the point. I am not looking for special treatment for me. And I don't want to have a unique version of PPM. What I have been trying to suggest is a change in the general approach so that when bugs need to be fixed care is taken NOT to change the user experience.

And when someone has a good idea for an improved user experience that can be made available for users to select or reject as it pleases them. Changes to the user experience should not be forced on users.

...R

mavrothal

Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 3108

Posted: Wed 25 Feb 2015, 18:58 Post subject:

Robin2 wrote:

What I have been trying to suggest is a change in the general approach so that when bugs need to be fixed care is taken NOT to change the user experience.

And when someone has a good idea for an improved user experience that can be made available for users to select or reject as it pleases them. Changes to the user experience should not be forced on users.

You are actually wrong on both counts.
Changing (improving) the users experience is a goal of every major program version change.
But in this case, PPM2 actually went to great length not to "enforce" this improvement on anyone.

And yet for few days and several responses later you complain about the missing specific layout even if the other available layout (Classic) is the exact older one.
Try to describe, what is this dramatic difference in user experience that was "forced" upon you. That you need an extra click to install a package with the new layout if you want to have the old click-as-you-go approach? That if you use the available "Classic" layout you are using one less click to uninstall a program compared to the layout that you apparently are so attached to?
That the default UI was changed? Puppy had 2 layouts in the PPM for quite some time and some puppies had default "Classic" while others the "Ziggy". Was up to the developer to set default and up to the user to do the same for him/herself. Is exactly the same now.

So describe in detail if possible what is that famous "user experience change" that you still go on on?...

It looks to me that someone is giving you a bigger, faster, safer, more economical/ecological car and you are bitching because is the new car is a "Ferrari red" instead of the "Honda red" that you liked so much.
So take your "Honda red" and stop trying to elevate you preference to software development philosophy. Specially, a totally unfounded one.
_________________
== Here is how to solve your Linux problems fast ==

MochiMoppel

Joined: 26 Jan 2011
Posts: 2084
Location: Japan

Posted: Wed 25 Feb 2015, 21:31 Post subject:

Robin2 wrote:

What I have been trying to suggest is a change in the general approach so that when bugs need to be fixed care is taken NOT to change the user experience.

I can understand your frustration, but in this case mavrothal is the wrong address.

I don't know tahrpup too well. but if tahrpup forces you to use PPM2 then your complaint should go to 666philb. I saw his comment about PPM2 being a "vast improvement". Though the conceived level of improvement will vary depending on each user's needs and perception, PPM2 is not a bug fix. It was started as a project to add features that users allegedly had asked for and as such it made a lot of changes to the underlying code and subsequently and naturally introduced new bugs, some of which already have been fixed. More bugs might be detected and - hopefully - fixed in the current testing phase. In other words: the current PPM2 is still beta, not yet in Woof and therefore I don't understand why a still unreleased program can already make it into tahrpup - unless tharpup itself is beta.

mavrothal

Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 3108

Posted: Thu 26 Feb 2015, 00:21 Post subject:

MochiMoppel wrote:

In other words: the current PPM2 is still beta, not yet in Woof

PPM2 is RC not beta and is not in woof because I'm just too cautious. As a matter of fact if you look at the log, minor or editorial or options things are changed since 1.9. As far as installing and removing packages the major function of a package manager, there are no bugs ie, failure to install or remove a package, since v1. Most changes since then have to do with the user experience.
This delay might have been wrong since the puppy culture is release often and fix bugs latter, because with so many pups and pupplets is impossible to get any decent testing with alphas, betas ot RCs.
I guess I'll give it another week and if nothing comes up I'll merge in woof-CE.

BTW Tahr 6.0.2 has an early version of PPM2 (1.4) and still, very few if any bugs are reported.
_________________
== Here is how to solve your Linux problems fast ==

ASRI éducation

Joined: 09 May 2009
Posts: 3203
Location: France

Posted: Sat 28 Feb 2015, 09:27 Post subject:

mavrothal wrote:

I guess I'll give it another week and if nothing comes up I'll merge in woof-CE.

Can you wait a few days?

I use momanager (version L18L), it tells me that the translation is done at 100%.
Yet, I find that some functions are not translated.
Must now I search the parts without gettext.

Regards
_________________
Projet ASRI éducation => Association | Forum | Dépôt | Espace kids

slavvo67

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Posts: 1625
Location: The other Mr. 305

Posted: Sat 28 Feb 2015, 13:58 Post subject:

Mav:

Thanks for being cautious. This is good stuff and while I don't always embrace change, this is a very nice addition to puppy. It took me a minute to figure out that you can still download the packages without install but it's there and works nicely.

Thanks,

Slavvo67

ASRI éducation

Joined: 09 May 2009
Posts: 3203
Location: France

Posted: Sat 28 Feb 2015, 14:11 Post subject:

ASRI éducation wrote:

I use momanager (version L18L), it tells me that the translation is done at 100%.
Yet, I find that some functions are not translated.

The problem is related to script /usr/local/petget/petget
All messages from this script seem properly gettexted (they are all present in the mo file).
However, some windows are still displayed in English (see screenshots below).
I do not understand where is the problem.
I will post a message on the "translation" forum to get help from other translators.
Regards

petget_gettext_example_03.png
Description
Filesize	10.37 KB
Viewed	347 Time(s)

petget_gettext_example_02.png
Description
Filesize	27.64 KB
Viewed	346 Time(s)

_________________
Projet ASRI éducation => Association | Forum | Dépôt | Espace kids

mavrothal

Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 3108

Posted: Sat 28 Feb 2015, 17:12 Post subject:

ASRI éducation wrote:

I use momanager (version L18L), it tells me that the translation is done at 100%.
Yet, I find that some functions are not translated.

I really do not know much about translations but I think it is because these messages are called from the /usr/lib/gtkdiealog/box_ok script that actually has

Quote:

TEXTDOMAIN=libstardust

If this indeed is the case this may be a more general problem than petget since Zigbert has all info dialogues using /usr/lib/gtkdialog/ scripts.
_________________
== Here is how to solve your Linux problems fast ==

mavrothal

Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 3108

Posted: Sun 01 Mar 2015, 14:24 Post subject:

Version 1.9.7 is out
See first post for changes and download.
_________________
== Here is how to solve your Linux problems fast ==

slavvo67

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Posts: 1625
Location: The other Mr. 305

Posted: Sun 01 Mar 2015, 15:29 Post subject:

Perhaps I caught this in mid-edit but I don't see a list of changes from the previous.

Best,

Slavvo67

Page 7 of 18 [262 Posts]

Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, ..., 16, 17, 18 Next

View previous topic :: View next topic

Forum index » House Training » Users ( For the regulars )

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum

[ Time: 0.1046s ][ Queries: 13 (0.0419s) ][ GZIP on ]