(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

Lobster wrote:Good luck with the 3 series Ttuuxx
Dingo have sent you a pm about the graphic . . .

Never received a PM from Dingo.
ttuuxxx

I meant I have sent a PM to Dingo about getting the requested graphic

ttuuxxx has my support for the new testing categories by series, in the forum [including no new thread policy] - good idea, overdue

sounds like a pizzasgood/Flash job?

Lobster, I'll input what I can, but am following tombh's thread primarily - no offence, different focus

I also like the idea of 4.2 being 2 series based, & 4.3 being 3 series based, though don't know enough about the inner workings/improvements to know how it could be implemented or why to do it/what advantages would be
- speed/stability/hardware compatibility/software updates, etc????

If some kind soul could give a run-through, in not too technical jargon.....?

can I ask for a wish list [also by series] to be put on the agenda

Aitch

Aitch wrote:... 4.2 being 2 series based, & 4.3 being 3 series based ...

More division of people, resources, HW and effort. Guess this means someone should start separate "4.3 Meeting - Here" thread, wiki page, SVN, etc. ...

See what I mean?

AJ

More division of people, resources, HW and effort

Yes, I gave that some thought, it's just that ever since I came to puppy over a year ago, during which time lots has happened, documentation has improved, new people/skills have emerged and 'allegiant teams' have moved certain projects forward,...
I started with 2.14 & still use both it & 2.14R because for me, v3 never worked properly, nor got 'developed', before v4 was issued, as if it was a wrong direction using slack, fundamentally changing the core of puppy
Now v4 /1/2 & v5 all being talked about
- so maybe more directed teamwork wouldn't be a bad thing
ttuuxxx, big_bass & a few others seem keen to do v3, and Lobster seems to be leading the charge on v4.2 so what's wrong with that?
maybe someone will do a new CE version?

However, even if, as ttuuxxx has suggested separate development threads are created for testing/co-ordinating to work, I don't see that we should not be able to gell together in one overall thread, as each team leader could update latest development

I can't remember who did 2.14R, but I gather there is plan to update it/2series to v4 but no idea who might be involved

Lobster, any clues?

Guess this means someone should start separate "4.3 Meeting - Here" thread

Isn't that happening, or is that another of your humorous posts?

Aitch [sorry if that's not on the agenda, - I never got one sent to me!]

The other problem with 'meeting here' threads, is no-one knows what 'chorate' means

[minimum number of who's in attendance, for those who don't know]

Aitch

Aitch wrote: I can't remember who did 2.14R, but I gather there is plan to update it/2series to v4 but no idea who might be involved

Lobster, any clues?

Dougal and pakt
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 230#157230

The point is we have many available options and projects to encourage.
There is no reason why we can not release this 2.14R as a full Puppy release, with the 2.14R numbering
When Tronkels and Jeffs version of 3.xx becomes available we can get behind that as a release
End users are impressed by what looks good and works
not which engine drives it . . .
If NOP or Muppy or another puplet are modified in a way that the community can get behind, that is an option.

I would prefer Unipup as the basis for 4.2 but that is just one potential . . .
The important thing is to maintain the flexibility of a Developer led distro not a 'rule by committee' that decides what needs to be done but is incapable of implementing anything . . .

Stay frisky.

mm - don't know anything about unipup yet, - think big_bass is playing with it?

The important thing is to maintain the flexibility of a Developer led distro not a 'rule by committee' that decides what needs to be done but is incapable of implementing anything . . .

unfortunately/more correctly, fortunately, that is in the hands of the developer, so all this is just posturing & clubbing, seeing if camps can be set up IMHO

puppies do bite each other in growing up.......

Aitch

I can't keep up with all this constant drama...

therefore count me out... I'll login every week (at least) or so to see if anybody wants on the SVN until there is a someone to take charge there (tombh or hairywill or caneri maybe they seem to be upto it on the web admin end)... and actually i wouldn't have any objection to maintaining it indefinitely and i think pissasgood may already be able to add users (I'll have to verify that)

I feel my time is better spent helping people and making some distro better (even if in a small way) than arguing here... and having a little fun while doing it. arguing is not my idea of fun

not to say you won't see me around here sometime but I don't feel like i want to be a part of this "community effort" aka community argument ...even back when puppy was at it's smallest and fastest i wanted better so the way things are going i don't see that happening.

hopefully you guys can figure out what you wanna do and center around it and not get all split between different ideas ... I'm just gonna say keep it real guys before i get off on a rant

Cb88

Lobster: If the 2.xx series incorporates some of the 4.xx updates, then it might be possible for 4.2 to be 2.xx based?
4.3 to be 3.xx based?

Sometimes the reader should be able to tell if the crustacean is just having fun (note that the big jump forward for a shrimp is backward).

But if that is a serious suggestion, then there is a problem because 4.1 is already taken. Probably start with 10. "10.1" would then mean "Puppy 1 revisited", and so on.

In re: version numbering - too freaking funny.

I can't keep up with all this constant drama...

When you come back in a week (perhaps sooner)
perhaps you can explain your idea further:

* Easy puppy apps access, eg.a single bz2 file or on sourceforge

You will find
the evolving description of Puppy 4.2 here:
http://www.puppylinux.org/wiki/archives ... ep-thought

Deep Thought is based on Puppy 4.11 (not yet available - which is the patched version of 4.1)

Current plan:

* Update the 'P' series programs and utils, eg. Petch
* Use of default webpage
* Puppy 'included software' upgrades eg. Mtpaint
* Easy puppy apps access, eg.a single bz2 file or on sourceforge
* Improved eye candy as available eg. Zigbert scheme

cb88: I can't keep up with all this constant drama...

Usually it takes much more energy to harmonize several people's views than to actually reach a given scope; not surprisingly, 99% of known masterpieces come from just one man's mind. Although many other people have contributed to it since its birth, I still see Barry's Puppy Linux basically as a one-man masterpiece.

The key to this success, IMHO, is the ability to clearly see all main points at once with their respective weight, which requires both organizational and software-developing skills. Not easy for one man, probably even harder for a team... but quite possible with the sure-fire ingredient: fun!

I have explained my ideas pretty extensivly perhaps overly so... in the myraid of threads on the topic of barry's retirement so read through them all again and feel my pain </sarcasm>

@capoverde sure I think it might be doable... but I just don't find what we are doing now fun at all

[

ttuuxxx
people have been e-mailing me to take over, 3 series

would you be so kind to make public this list
and is that an example of your democratic system
of establishing a community vote ?

I think that so many people gasped at your statements
and sucked all the air out of this room and turned off any
possible real productive talks

let me offer a practical example of team work
one geek to another *those that are staying out of it

amigo and I have been talking about for several weeks
many technical details not arguing running tests and breaking new ground
for long term gains not sugar fixes
that get quick popular votes


and I urge others who have been turned off by the hype and drama to form together in pairs
or small groups if possible

and go back to being geeks having fun and advancing
linux

wow no wonder I see why even Barry himself is staying out of it bogs down the cpu cycles
when you could be breaking new ground


P.S I f anyone wants to help out and be productive
try out MU's new test iso he just compiled
that would help advance puppy
he needs testers
ftp://ks301128.kimsufi.com/testing/puppy4.1-k2.6.27/

cya
big_bass

Aitch wrote:The other problem with 'meeting here' threads, is no-one knows what 'chorate' means

[minimum number of who's in attendance, for those who don't know]

Aitch

Sorry Aitch but the word you want is "quorate"

The Compact Oxford Dictionary wrote:quorate

• adjective Brit. (of a meeting) attended by a quorum.

where a 'quorum' is

The Compact Oxford Dictionary wrote:quorum

• noun (pl. quorums) the minimum number of members of an assembly or society that must be present at a meeting to make the proceedings valid.

See http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/quorum?view=uk

I agree with your sentiment actually, which is why I think that Lobster's early suggestion that we move in small steps is valuable. It would help establish a methodology where what works is retained, what fails is dropped, and the in-between is refined. We can think bigger thoughts later when a working model is established.

The thing to avoid is ego and hubris and rushing into things.

The Open Source world seems to be made up of a strange mixture of open-handed and hearted generosity combined with messianic certainty in the rightness of one's own opinion and the obligation to shove it in the face of anyone who asks - and many that don't.

But Barry is different. One of the most astonishing things about him is just how humble and ego-free he has been.

We will make most progress if we acknowledge straight away that if we see further it's only because we stand on giant's shoulders. And if the mighty Newton believed that then we (who, let's face it, have much to be modest about) should adopt it as our motto forthwith.

raffy wrote:Perhaps it is 4.12? Barry has mentioned his intention to create 4.2 many times already. If 4.10 gets updated for last-minute problems, then 4.11 will be released.

Just my 0.02c.

My plan was that the numbering would go back to having a dot between each digit.

4.1 is our current release.
4.1.1 is going to be a bugfix release, that I intend to bring out.
4.1.n these are either bugfixes or alphas or betas.
4.2 the next official release.

As I am targeting 4.1.1 for the near future, and want to move on to my UniPup work, I doubt that I will work on 4.2, so that's for you guys.

Thanks, Nick, I knew it didn't look right, but was tired [& lazy]

The thing to avoid is ego and hubris and rushing into things.

abso-bloomin'-lutely

Barry, Thanks for clarifying, could you look in here? and maybe comment?

http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 4&start=45

Aitch

Below is Barry's comments (and links) from his blog 15 Oct 2008
http://www.puppylinux.com/blog/

Also note a second blog entry in which he states Dougal as a potential
developer for 4.2
With some other potential developers.



Plans for the future of Puppy
Since I announced that I was taking a back seat, effective from release of 4.1 (well, 4.1.1 actually), there has been a lot of discussion and planning. I have not been following any of this, but now have some time to read through it. First step is to collect all the links, and here is what I found:

Puppy 4.2 - desktop and artwork
zigbert
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=34331

4.2 meeting - here
Lobster
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=34201

Establishing a formal community
tombh
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=34134

Puppy Community
Lobster
http://puppylinux.org/wiki/archives/old ... -community

PuppyCommunity
Lobster
http://tmxxine.com/wik/wikka.php?wakka=PuppyCommunity

Puppy's future
Bruce B
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=32169

Puppy 4.2
Lobster
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=33454

Barry's retirement from Puppy
tronkel
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=32078

How should Puppy be developed when Barry steps down?
disciple
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=32192

DEVELOPERS to CONTRIBUTORS (STAKEHOLDERS)
ttuuxx
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=33484

Puppy Community Register
mysticmarks
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=32183

Puppy Linux community repo is active on sourceforge
cb88
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=32215

...I am now in the process of reading through all these links.

regarding numbering of versions, my plan was that the numbering would go back to having a dot between each digit:

4.1 is our current release.
4.1.1 is going to be a bugfix release, that I intend to bring out.
4.1.n these are either bugfixes or alphas or betas.
4.2 the next official 'final' release.

As I am targeting 4.1.1 for the near future, and want to move on to my UniPup work, I doubt that I will work on 4.2, so that's for you guys.

So we now know the first alpha version of Puppy 4.2
will be called 4.1.2 and is a simple improvement of the 4.1.1
release that Barry will produce

So we can plan for
something like:

4.1.1 Barry (patches and bug fixes for 4.1)
4.1.2 Community including Barry first improvements (new code / wish list / upgrades etc) first 4.2 Alpha
4.1.3 second 4.2 Alpha testing and checking new features
4.1.4 third 4.2 Alpha improvements based on feedback
4.1.5 feature lock preparing for first beta
4.1.6 4.2 first beta
4.1.7 4.2 second beta based on feedback
4,1.8 4.2 first release candidate
4.1.9 4.2 second release candidate

4.2 Next official Puppy

Is there any merit in establishing a scheme whereby releases with different intentions are numbered differently? I'm thinking like Ubuntu where what they call LTS (for Long Term Support) releases have even numbers and more cutting edge and experimental have odd numbers.

This thinking could help us parse the suggestions into that which is for everyone and stands a good chance of being stable, and those that are nearer "the edge" so-to-speak.

Barry has given us 4.1 in both latest and retro kernel versions. I'd like to make the suggestion that we stick with the retro version for our Version 4 and declare it to be the "LTS" release, and move the latest kernel version to 5.0 and then leave it there for a time while we establish our working practices.

This is just an idea made available for comments and criticism.