Hi all,
Ok, from responses since my last post:
nooby, (16 April)
I'm sure seaside is the first to admit that his approach is experimental, and while it seems to me like a good idea it is really beyond the scope of an 'official' Puppy. I hope you understand.
sc0ttman, (16 April)
Your first point about 'jumping the gun'. It takes several months to put a release together. I don't even want to talk about it too much because
nothing is set in stone at this stage. Well, people may not even want me as a leader. Either way, I'll continue on with what I do.
On your second,third and fourth points, version numbers go in numerical order. It makes no difference if the next release is called 526 or 1000.
On your points about window manager apps, that is a valid concern. Do you propose a solution? If so I am all ears, if not I have some ideas.
On size, well the Vesa only idea is very experimental. However i did build a 101M relatively sane BABY spup-100. Try it if you like, see the spup thread. It uses Barry's
4babybuild script (a new addition) in woof.
Conservative libs is not an option when building with binary compatibility, however, that doesn't completely mean that things can't be backwards compatiile. The aim is to have a minimum of libs necessary. Slackware compatibility does lend itself to this. So, the chances of a static compile of an app will have greater chance of working in earlier Puppies. That said, we have no control over the requirements of the big devs, (mozilla, chromium, libreoffice etc). Of course I invite (um if I'm it) all compilers to get the best bang for byte out of any app.
All users are going to want this and that, me too, but we have limits and we work within them.
stu90, (16 April)
Browser chooser was nice but I am of the opinion that we need a full featured secure browser in the disto by default. When I first used Puppy I didn't like seamonkey too much either, but I am a former netscape user and I soon realised the similarities. In Lupu there is Midori, Dillo, the nss and nspr libs, and Sylpheed. All this adds up to about 9M compressed. Current Seamonkey is about 12M compressed. I preferred Puppy 500's approach with Puppy Browser but it's too out dated now. Of course browser choosing can be in, but Seamonkey (if I have any say), is in by default. I'm sure I'll get a million detractors, but that's how I feel about it.
Iguleder, (16 April)
"new2dir" works for well for most packages.
tubeguy, (17 April)
See answer to sc0ttman up the page.
Lobster, (17 April)
Ian is most welcome to help any way he can. I think he's in Brisbane? Only a half hour drive for me.
sszindian, (17 April)
Nice thoughts! A full on Puppy cloud service! Certainly possible, jamesbond, Master_wrong et al have been doing just that. However we are concerned with the more immediate future with the next Puppy version, not to say that your idea doesn't have merit.
stu90, (18 April)
Well, I guess the cloud can be viewed from different angles.
Luluc, (19 April)
"What does that mean? Will I have to migrate all my Ubuntu packages to Slackware?" you said.
Puppy is Puppy. Binary compatibility is another thing. I would hope that some body picks up on Ubuntu woof development with Maverick or Natty. It
is doable. The rationale behind Slackware development of Puppy is historical as well as personal for me. That doesn't mean to say that I am the be all and end all, Barry is yet to approve any of this. It's his Puppy.
Now to address the "xz" compression idea, yes maybe it's bad, especially for older kit. I don't want to alienate the faithful. That is where the 100MB thing comes into the equation. This is possible by removing some not so well used kernel modules and printer drivers and placing them in a "zdrv" (search it
).
I agree 100% with Lobster on chat, Xchat is only about 300K compressed, as for Transmission, well that can be an add on as far as I'm concerned. Of course more comprehensive chat programs are/will be made available.
Encryption needs to be worked on. Want a portfolio?
As for auditing of packages, currently there is no signature in 'official' packages, so that may have to be taken up with the BD.
The next valid point would be the sound mixer. Playdayz mentions this in the other 5.3 thread. Any one know of a good light weight mixer? (gtk)
Lobster, (19 April)
I agree that the 'cloud' is here and accessible. It should be an option in my opinion in any OS. I also agree about chat, see above. As for running the browser as user 'spot' (or any other user) then that can be an option too. Finer points need to be worked out but I'm sure it can be done.
goolwa_pup, (19 April)
"just because your paranoid does not mean they are not after you", you said.. true, but it made me laugh!
ttuuxxx, (19 April)
Glad to have you on board! (That's as so long as we have a vessel :;): ). good compiles I think are the key to a good, small, stable release.
noryb009, (19 April)
"why is 5.3 going to be based on slackware when we already have ubuntu working?", you said. Why not? We're not Ubuntu, we're not Slackware. Actually, there may be more interest in an Arch based pup. Nothing is decided yet, I'll reiterate.
SouthPaws, (19 April)
"What about Debian...?", you said. I agree, we could do that too, but I have decided (and I being me) on Slackware. I'm not the boss! I do what
I want. It's fun that way. Read above about whether this is final.
sszindian, (19 April)
Debian was going to be Puppy 5 with
gposil, but he had some unforeseen circumstances and had to leave. If Iguleder wants Puppy 5.3 or 6 or whatever he can have it (in the best spirit
) but I doubt he has the time or the inclination to follow it the 'woof' way.
Iguleder, (20 April)
see above
puppyluvr, (20 April)
I know you are keen, what do you want to offer?
nooby, (20 April)
Ah nooby my friend
, devs are just glorified users you know
dawnsboy
What I said to puppyluvr
______________________________________________
note. I am just a bloke who knows how to use the woof build system. It's fully up to Barry and you lot if I am to coordinate a puppy version. That doesn't mean to say I don't want help! I need every ounce possible. All of your responses I have read and considered. I hope it shows!
Cheers!