Page 1 of 2

Puppy CE

Posted: Sun 03 Feb 2008, 12:41
by tronkel
What do you think about this for a modularised approach to building 3.10CE (or should it be 3.03CE?)

The CE version needs to conform to with the well-established principles that have already ensured Puppy's success to date.

Since there is no way that we want a bloated iso - even for a CE edition, how about modularising the whole job using sfs modules a la 2.15CE?. This was one of the star features of 2.15CE and maybe the reason it is still so popular.

Module 1: Codename "Chihuahua"
This is a barebones version of 302Alpha. This can be generated automatically by Unleashed and can be cut-down even further if required. This base version also ought to have a functioning HotPup, something that the Puppy 3 series does not appear to support as yet.

Module 2: Codename "Lassie"
Most people will download this as well. This contains the stuff that represents the difference between Barebones and 302Alpha - plus appearance enhancements. Would include EZpup. Browser yet to be decided.

i.e. Barebones + Lassie.sfs = 3.10CE for most people.
Barebones would have a prominent start-up message that points the user to Lassie

Module 3 Codename "Boxer"
This contains the optional heavy-weight stuff e.g. Openoffice, video editing, all three main browsers plus other stuff. Contents yet to be decided.

Chihuahua is where all the under-the-hood tweaking will be done - e.g. fixes to frugal install, multisession etc.

All three modules could be worked-on simultaneuosly with a module leader allocated for each. Working on all three simultaneously will cut down on the time necessary to get the job done.

BTW please have a re-read of Barry's blog announcement of 302 Alpha1. I'm not 100% sure if we ought to be ending up with a 3.10CE final or a 302CE final - two entirely different animals (sorry, Pups!)

Whadaya think This is a community edition. It's up to you!

Posted: Sun 03 Feb 2008, 14:20
by alienjeff
On first blush, I'm very much in favor of this simplified modular approach: barebone/core/skeleton, standard issue, and fuller featured modules. This approach allows for parallel development and innovation, yet introduces a necessary discipline with module leaders. This benevolent fencing of specific project territory is a good idea. The fences can be adjusted as needed, but shouldn't be torn down or otherwise done away with.

Though such a structured approach will raise cries of blasphemy from the "Ready-Fire-Aim" and "Willy-Nilly" camps, I believe the integrity of the end product will ultimately justify the methodology.

well-supported

Posted: Sun 03 Feb 2008, 21:10
by raffy
This idea has been well-supported since the time of Puppy 2.01. I guess the problem then was that no leads or groups were in charge of the accompanying sfs modules. But since 2.15CE, WhoDo has taken charge of the graphics enhancements as EZpup.

Volunteers for the (1) base, (2) standard applications, and (3) other packages are welcome. There were already groups for these packages in 2.15CE, and WhoDo would be familiar with their activities.

The Puppy unleashed for 3.02 should benefit from the changes done in Dingo. One useful feature is support for the humongous initrd for network-booting.

Posted: Sun 03 Feb 2008, 21:47
by Caneri
Remember 2.15CE and it's popularity, as in exceeding bandwidth on most of the servers...well this time I hope we are ready for another smash hit!

This sounds like a job that puppylinux.ca was created for....I'm in with both feet.

Let the good times roll.

EDIT: I agree with the above posts and look forward to this CE.

Eric

Posted: Sun 03 Feb 2008, 22:48
by klu9
Caneri wrote:Remember 2.15CE and it's popularity, as in exceeding bandwidth on most of the servers...well this time I hope we are ready for another smash hit!

This sounds like a job that puppylinux.ca was created for....I'm in with both feet.

Let the good times roll.
you sound like you want your server to take a pasting! :shock: so all this time, my work with xdelta, coblitz, bittorrent and metalinks hasn't been helping you out; it's just been getting in the way of your masochistic server-meltdown fantasies :lol: :lol: :lol:

Posted: Sun 03 Feb 2008, 22:50
by Eyes-Only
Sounds great! Unfortunately there's nothing more I can do than sit here and cheer you folks on. But I love the concept guys, I really do, 200%. I've found that ever since I've been using the 3 series I've really enjoyed these .sfs files and how you're able to greatly expand the functionality of Puppy via this system, especially with such modules like OpenOffice, or the KDE/Xfce, etc. Obviously they're not for everyone---but they're available for those who wish them.

Thumbs up on this one---and Slackware compatibility to boot (no pun intended!). Does life get any better than this? :)

Amicalement,

Eyes-Only
"L'Peau-Rouge"

Posted: Sun 03 Feb 2008, 23:06
by Caneri
@klu9,

The server melt-down is a sign of success...tombh with wNOP and a few others have made me proud to be knocked off the web.

With your help this time , and the fantastic people working on this CE we should be able to handle another run away CE.

Thanks for your work. It's surely my pleasure to be a part of it...but I'm in!!

Eric

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 00:14
by BarryK
BTW please have a re-read of Barry's blog announcement of 302 Alpha1. I'm not 100% sure if we ought to be ending up with a 3.10CE final or a 302CE final - two entirely different animals (sorry, Pups!)
I only suggested 3.10 as final as I didn't know how many alphas and betas you would want to release. It's nice to release each alpha/beta with its own version number as it avoids problems with Puppy finding a file on the hard drive from an older alpha/beta and using that thus messing up testing of the latest alpha/beta.

I also thought v3.10 final is good as there are significant improvements from 3.01, even more so when you guys have given it the treatment!

Note, I'll probably give backporting the Dingo Universal Installer the number one priority while on holiday, and will upload it asap. The 3.02alpha1 uses the Uni Installer from 3.01.

Don't forget that Raffy now has full control of puppylinux.org and pupweb.org, so you can do anything you want on those sites to present 3.10CE. Also Eric's puppylinux.ca.

3.01 vs 3.10

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 04:15
by raffy
Hmm, hey, have a nice trip, Barry. :)
It's nice to release each alpha/beta with its own version number as it avoids problems with Puppy finding a file on the hard drive from an older alpha/beta and using that thus messing up testing of the latest alpha/beta.
If you could excuse tired old eyes which can easily confuse 3.01 and 3.10, I hope that the sequence of releases ends with 3.09 :!:

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 05:21
by Lobster
What I would suggest is Puppy 3.02CE is based on the developing Talking Stick that Robert (Ecomoney) is heading

Barry has suggested something along these lines
with future Puppys being based on Muppy or other initiatives
In other words it might be not just PuppyCE
but a full release version . . .

For now a potential 3.03CE based on the 3.01 Alpha does not have a project leader.
Tronkel?

By sharing and modifying code from puplets and emerging efforts, we can support Robert as we plan for the future

I have tried to accommodate these developing Community Editions, which may well turn into full Puppys and their modular approach here
http://puppylinux.org/wikka/TalkingStick

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 05:31
by ttuuxxx
Lobster wrote:What I would suggest is Puppy 3.02CE is based on the developing Talking Stick that Robert (Ecomoney) is heading

For now a potential 3.03CE based on the 3.01 Alpha does not have a project leader.
Tronkel?
If he doesn't want it you can sign me up, I did take project management last year, it was 65% of my diploma, which i passed, and still really happy about it !!!
:)

if not I understand, :)
plus i'm helping a bit with talking stick.:)
ttuuxxx

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 06:34
by Lobster
ttuuxxx wrote:
If he doesn't want it you can sign me up, I did take project management last year, it was 65% of my diploma, which i passed, and still really happy about it !!!
:)
Great news.
I will add you as acting Leader to the wiki
Just been working on the offline web page
- that needs some work. Anyone up for it?

and will use Tronkel's suggested "Lassie" as the codename

For now using the modular approach
we can support both 3.02 (Talking Stick) and 3.03 (Lassie)

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 07:26
by alienjeff
Lobster wrote:What I would suggest is Puppy 3.02CE is based on the developing Talking Stick that Robert (Ecomoney) is heading ... <snip> ... For now a potential 3.03CE based on the 3.01 Alpha does not have a project leader.
Tronkel? ... <snip> ... I have tried to accommodate these developing Community Editions, which may well turn into full Puppys and their modular approach here
http://puppylinux.org/wikka/TalkingStick ... <snip> ... For now using the modular approach we can support both 3.02 (Talking Stick) and 3.03 (Lassie)
Who the hell elected you as the CE Ringleader? And you're spearheading the parallel development of TWO community editions? Are you out of your mind? (rhetorical question)

This is a train wreck in the making.

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 07:58
by WhoDo
Lobster wrote:What I would suggest is Puppy 3.02CE is based on the developing Talking Stick that Robert (Ecomoney) is heading
Lob, I think you're a tad confused. It happens. Talking Stick - the CE project that has morphed to a 2.14r base under Robert - is NOT going to come out with a 3.02CE designation. It will still be a 2.xx series Puppy. Talk was of making it 2.20CE

OTOH, since the release of 3.02Alpha1, many of us are really keen to start a protracted development and testing cycle for the new 3.xx series CE; call it 3.02CE or 3.10CE which appears to be Barry's preference given the potential number of alphas and betas and how confused puppy can become if there is more than one file with the same Puppy name.
Lobster wrote:Barry has suggested something along these lines with future Puppys being based on Muppy or other initiatives In other words it might be not just PuppyCE
but a full release version . . .
Potentially, yes. Given that Barry is planning to go fossicking in the not-too-distant future, I'm sure he's treating this as a test run to see if the community is ready to take over development of future puppy versions.
Lobster wrote:For now a potential 3.03CE based on the 3.01 Alpha does not have a project leader.
Tronkel?
I suggest a co-leadership of the 3.xx series CE development between ttuuxxx and tronkel. Jack is happier in the background contributing ideas and C++ code, while ttuuxxx knows how to develop multiple versions and we now find out he also has project leadership qualifications.
Lobster wrote:By sharing and modifying code from puplets and emerging efforts, we can support Robert as we plan for the future

I have tried to accommodate these developing Community Editions, which may well turn into full Puppys and their modular approach here
http://puppylinux.org/wikka/TalkingStick
I will have a look at what you've done, but bear in mind there are still TWO DIFFERENT projects with a CE designation. Robert has no intention of changing his mind about basing Talking Stick on 2.14r because of the bug fixing required. He has said as much in the comparable thread.

Anyone disagree with my suggestion?

practical problem

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 08:09
by raffy
Barry has noted the practical problem of releasing and testing versions, which requires a sequence of numbers starting with 3.02 and possibly ending in 3.10 (that I hoped will end in 3.09).

With this in mind, it will be useful to focus instead on the improvements and where such will go, i.e., (1) to the core, (2) to the standard applications, or (3) to the bigger enhancements. The build is 3.02 now, the next will be 3.03, and so on.

Addition: Just saw WhoDo's post - nice idea for co-leadership of the project. I know that Tronkel is senior and guess that ttuuxxx is young, so it could be a good blend. :)

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 10:45
by Lobster
Lob, I think you're a tad confused. It happens.
Yes I am confused :?
Happens all the time

The names are not important or the numbers
The point I am making is the Next Puppy can have both 2.14 and Dingo code and from puplets and still be the next Puppy - Barry was even hinting a community edition would be a full Puppy. In that sense it might be 3.02

I suggest a co-leadership of the 3.xx series CE development between ttuuxxx and tronkel. Jack is happier in the background contributing ideas and C++ code, while ttuuxxx knows how to develop multiple versions and we now find out he also has project leadership qualifications.
That all sounds ideal if everyone is agreeable and the wiki
can be amended :)

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 16:00
by ttuuxxx
I'm Just wondering if anyone has a forum that could be locked and only team members of puppy ce would have a password, so we can have discussions amongst ourselves. Its nice having open forums but it does take some of the surprise away from our fans. We also could divide the forum into sections, like graphics, packages, bugs, ideas, etc, then finally arrange the subsection into chronological order. So we all know what has to be done by who and when.

just an idea :)
ttuuxxx

oh ya one quick note
I think puppy 302 should of been called "BOSS" like the mustang or "Shotgun" like the shotgun, lol those are real manly names, oh well maybe puppy 3.51 "Cleavland" or "Windsor" or "Modified" lol I love my fords mustangs.
And for the puppy 4.0 series we could have a 4.27 Cobra Ce.

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 16:23
by alienjeff
ttuuxxx wrote:I'm Just wondering if anyone has a forum that could be locked and only team members of puppy ce would have a password, so we can have discussions amongst ourselves.
Take a look at that again and see if you can spot a paradox. Hints: "open" source software, "community" edition.
Its nice having open forums but it does take some of the surprise away from our fans.
Your fans? Before you get too involved, ttuuxxx, it would behoove you to get your ego in check.

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 16:37
by ttuuxxx
alienjeff wrote:
ttuuxxx wrote:I'm Just wondering if anyone has a forum that could be locked and only team members of puppy ce would have a password, so we can have discussions amongst ourselves.
Take a look at that again and see if you can spot a paradox. Hints: "open" source software, "community" edition.
Its nice having open forums but it does take some of the surprise away from our fans.
Your fans? Before you get too involved, ttuuxxx, it would behoove you to get your ego in check.
now now Alien

I get tons of emails, mostly compliments on my Variants, People asking for more, etc. Sure I'm no Paris Hilton, but you haven't seen me in a bikini:)
ttuuxxx

ps i don't wear bikinis

Posted: Mon 04 Feb 2008, 22:04
by cthisbear
" I'm Just wondering if anyone has a forum that could be locked and only team members of puppy ce would have a password. "

ttuuxxx.......bad hair day.....weird to say the least.....isn't that why we PM.
Not being nasty to you......as I have told you before really liked your
FireHydrant 3.01C.

Open Source should equal Open Thoughts.

Chris.