Puppy109 - release schedule

[Lobster]

Puppy109

Barry is focusing on Puppy2. He has agreed that we can create 1.0.9 as a community based Puppy.
As The Foundation tries to share the development allowing for Barry's announced semi-retirement we need to practice and develop our skills.

There is no Puppy without Barry. His position as 'benevolent dictator for life' is honed and enhanced by being 'cutting edge developer' for Puppy2 (alpha 5 within the week from April 9 2006)
PracticePuppy109 is offered as a way of thank you to Barry and to prove we can be trusted to keep and improve the Puppy ethos well into the future to whatever extent and direction he cares to suggest. No Puppy without Barry.

I suggest we release ISO's as often as possible
We must do all we can to get Developers onto broadband
Barry was meant to get it (possibly) any news on that?

OK who wants to release the first 109 release candidate/alpha or whatever ISO?
I would recommend MU - being fast to get us going and having broadband? Or Pizzasgood being a proven developer.

* Add decent icons - finally - pleeez - somebody
* Change default Browser to Firefox with extras (to be decided)
* Simplify menus (remove names of programs) as in Simplepup
* Add Trashcan enhancements - that is recent code
* Remove Beaver add Geany
* Make Leafpad the default editor
* Make Icewm WM. 100% reliable, configurable and well liked by users
* Incorporate Marks puppybasic find script remove other find software
* Add browser links
* Put help file online/translated/as add on
* Add download or link to .pet and sfs
* Add rpm downloader
* Add Ian's Puppymoney
* Backport any technologies from Puppy2 eg Wget GUI

More details and suggestions can be EDITED here
http://puppylinux.org/wikka/PracticePuppy

[klhrevolutionist]

EDIT

Well I take back what I wrote. Sorry to get everybody in an uproar.
Next time I will ask sweetly if I can even participate! Thanks!

[Ted Dog]

I think it would be good to put together a method of patches, diffs etc so that we could easily steal ideas from the ISO before us.

bar that I vote MU ISO master-in-charge, I hear he is not that busy this minute, sleeping I hope. Otherwise its a free-fer-all anarchy rules (which would favor Pizzasgood )

[keenerd]

Individual developers creating whole remasters is overkill. While I do like the benevolent dictator model, there is no reason for everyone to be there own personal dictator. What if MU, Pizzasgood, and khl all make nice remasters. What if none of them keep detailed notes as to what they added or removed? How do we merge all three?

A community based Puppy is already here.

Its called the dotpup patch.

I am strongly against the creation of a million ISO images. The community should put out a single new remaster every other month. Let's keep it simple for the users and simple for the developers.

All the developers submit uber-dotpups, which could then be reviewed and checked for errors. These do not go on the regular dotpup page, because 75% of them will already be installed. A new patch maintence webpage needs to be implemented, which will at the very least keep track of what needs to be fixed before the patch can be slipstreamed in.

With a good patch repository system, Puppy development will increase by an order of magnitude.

[pakt]

If Puppy 109 is to have Firefox instead of Seamonkey, then Sylpheed, which has problems handling national characters, will need to be replaced with Thunderbird.

keenerd: How does dotpup patch work ?

Paul

[Nathan F]

Please do some extra reading everybody. Puppy iso's have for quite some time been put together by Barry using Puppy Unleashed, based upon unleashed packages. To make changes to the iso it is necessary to alter and/or upgrade the packages making up the iso. This is quite different from the idea of remastering the iso using an existing iso, and much better than just applying a dotpup as a patch. This is also how I feel we should create Puppy 109.

If we are to go ahead as a community to create Puppy 109 then here is how I propose we do it. We should copy the current Puppy Unleashed suite to a server and give a select group of developers upload access to it. They could then check out a package, make what they feel are the appropriate changes to it, and upload it into a testing directory for peer review. Once changes are accepted then they could go into the main tree and replace the current package, and an entry could then be logged as to the changes. Anyone could check the current status of development by downloading the changes and building an iso using Puppy Unleashed. Once the community feels that we've gotten it right then we build the iso and upload any new or changed packages to ibiblio and nluug which then become Puppy Unleashed version 109. In this way many could contribute without having competing iso's.

I agree that Mark would be a good person to head up the development, if he were to accept the role. Others I feel should have access to the process would include Raffy and Jonothan Marsden. There are others obviously but I feel strongly that at least those three should be at the core of the effort if they are willing.

Obviously I spend a great deal of my time developing and tweaking Grafpup, but since it's destiny is so tied to that of Puppy I would very much like to take part in the process at some level. My goal would not be to change Puppy into Grafpup but to help continue with what Barry has created as Puppy.

We already have two obvious locations to carry this proposal forward, either at dotpups.de or at puppyfiles.us. We just need to reach an agreement and move forward.

I hope I have not stepped on anyones toes, reading over my words I may not have come off very friendly.

Nathan

[MU]

I reject.
Reasons:
I prefer developping tools, that can be used in all flavours of puppy.
Of course an "own" iso would attract me, but it is too timeconsuming.

I prefer approaches like usr_more.sfs, like megapup, which is a kind of "total conversion", by still keeping maximum compatibility (as it is just an addon).

To "clean" up the menus, you could write an english translationfile for this translator
http://www.murga.org/~puppy/viewtopic.php?t=7165

Example:
File managers

[keenerd]

Oops. I always forget about the unleashed / pupGet packages!

But usually these are whole programs in themselves, and a fair amount of work in puppy is script patching.

I agree with Nathan, though.

[Sit Heel Speak]

.

[Nathan F]

I understand MU's reluctance to lead such a project but hope that he will at least take part if it goes forward.

As for some of the other comments I'd like to offer some of my thoughts up here.

Firefox is nice but there are extremely good reasons why Barry has always included Mozilla, most notably for the inclusion of the Composer element. If we were to replace Mozilla with Firefox we would either have to do without an html editor or accept a very large size increase by adding NVU. Bluefish is a possible program but is not at all friendly to novice users, and that is probably why Barry removed it several releases back. My preference would be to stay with Mozilla or update it to Seamonkey, and to add the mail client back in.

There is nothing wrong with Beaver as an editor but we really don't need more than one in the iso. At most what we really need is one editor for graphical use and one console based. I'd like to stick with Leafpad for it's simplicity.

The icons would not be hard to fix up and I agree that we should go ahead and do it. A couple of notes on this, Barry did give a partial facelift a couple of releases back that included a few nicer icons and credit should be given for it. I just think we can do more and better. Also,changing icons is a slightly larger project than it at first appears since you then have to edit WM menus, pinboard file, possibly some wizards that use the current icons, possibly ROX configuration and GTK themes, etc. All in all quite a few packages might require alterations depending on how far you take it. If all we change are desktop icons then the project is much smaller.

I love icewm but see nothing wrong with JWM, and it really make Puppy that much more unique. The suggestion to addd in such things as enlightenment and afterstep or windowmaker would unfortunately add way too much to the size.

There seems to be a large bit of confusion about what Ian's Puppy Money is for. Puppy Money is nothing more or less than a nice program for handling your personal finances, written by a Puppy enthusiast specifically for Puppy. It has nothing to do with Paypal or any other online payment schemes. I applaud Ian's effort and endorse putting it into the iso, possibly as a replacement for xfinance.

The menu could use a little bit of cleaning up, but not oversimplification. I hate loading a Linux distro and seeing menu entries that just say "email client" and you are left wondering which of the twenty or so that are out there it might actually be. If I'm a web designer and have six defferent browsers installed for testing purposes then I want to know exactly which one is being launched and not have the menu entry dumbed down to just "browser". I do think that a few structural changes could be made to the menu, along with some added clarification.

There is already a forum thread for 109 suggestions, so it would be best to post ideas there inorder to keep them in one place. My important points above were that we need to decide as a community who will be in charge of 109 development, where to hold the development tree, and who will have permission to make changes to it. That is IF we are to make a community based Puppy iso. The way discussion wanders sometimes makes me worry about our ability to do it.

Nathan

[MU]

Bombayrockers prettypup includes nice Icons, updated Roxicons, Xfce-panel, Icewm-themes, Gtkthemes.

You could combine parts of it with his "SilverXP"-Metatheme, and would have a small and beautifull Desktop.

http://www.murga.org/~puppy/viewtopic.php?t=7168
http://dotpups.de/dotpups/WindowManager ... goodlooks/
http://dotpups.de/dotpups/WindowManager ... rs-silver/

I think a Desktop based on Icewm/Xfce is good, as it is very configurable.
Jwm should be left in, as it needs almost no resources.

However testing is required, as some Gtk-themes produce error-messages (missing fonts/pixmaps). These errors go to STDOUT, so that some tools like Pupget (install alien package) or the Backgroundsetter do not work with them.
(They rely on a "clean" STDOUT-output).

Mark

[Trobin]

My important points above were that we need to decide as a community who will be in charge of 109 development, where to hold the development tree, and who will have permission to make changes to it. That is IF we are to make a community based Puppy iso. The way discussion wanders sometimes makes me worry about our ability to do it.

Nathan

I think the first question to ask is - is there someone willing to take on the job?

[BarryK]

What do you guys think about the idea of dropping the dots, that was
discussed recently on another thread?
So it will be version 109?

Reasons for:
1. Windows refugees are unfamiliar with the multiple-dots notation.
2. Puppy uses integer numbering internally, ex /etc/puppyversion.

Reasons against:
1. A bit weird, suddently announcing release of version 109 or 200.

[Trobin]

My suggestion would be to leave them in.

1.0.1, 1.0.2, 1.0.3,.....1.0.8, 109, 200?

If I saw a progression like that I think I would be expecting som really major improvements, more than just bugfixes, \between 1.0.8 and 109.

[MU]

I'm often too lazy to type the dots in messages, so I think getting rid of them is just fine.

[Pizzasgood]

I'll have to opt out of Lobster's generous nomination. I don't have the time to be reliable enough to do it.

Personally, I like Nathan's proposal. If we don't use unleashed packages, 109 would remained leashed. People wouldn't be able to unleash their own 109. It would also be simpler to modify packages than to do an alternate remastering procedure. It's more modular. People could be assigned to specific packages, and when they finish they'd upload them. Then they can be tested and approved. Then they can possibly be passed on to another person for another change. Whereas if we used the alternate method, tasks would overlap and things would be more chaotic. Keeping track of what other people have done that might interfere with what you do would get tricky.

I suggest that rather than somebody who has experience as the leader/coordinator, we should choose someone who has time, patience, and organization. That person needs to coordinate everybody else, not be able to produce a remaster himself. He might not know how to do this or that, but he should know who does or who can learn the best, and then assign the tasks and keep everybody straight.

Then people like me or MU, who either don't possess the needed aspects, or just don't want to do it for whatever reason, would sign on for the tasks we want and do them, offering advice to others or the coordinator when neccissary.

I'd state my suggestions on what 109 should be, but I think we should decide on a coordinator first. Then we can set up an organized method of making suggestions and start recording them. Some of the trickier things I see are going to be the windowmanager and browser. Everybody's going to be flocking in, enlightening eachother on their cool WM preferences, while others will sing about their hot new browser. Everyone from dillos to dinosaurs will show up, and even a couple average Joes. So we need to have somebody in charge to keep track of what's going on, and take charge when necissary, either making a decision or instituting a vote. But not until both sides have presented their cases, and it is weighed in against the other developments.

So, the way I see it is
1. Get a coordinator
2. Develop a master plan for what we want 109 to be
3. Work out the details of what we want to do
4. Do it
5. Test it
6 Discuss, lather, and repeat steps 4-6
7 Etc.
8 Release test isos
9 Release final iso
10 Sleep


So, who is willing to coordinate us? Don't be shy, but instead, do your duty! We want YOU to be Puppy 109's coordinator!

[Nathan F]

Pizzasgood you are right on the money here. Any takers?

Nathan

[Lobster]

Agree with Barry, Puppy109 as name - we use it that way and we are not confused (speaking for myself) and in a while no one else will be. Even Windows users can count (yes I have heard the rumours . . .)

Good suggestion from MU about BombayRockers new Beautified Pup

One of the reasons Puppy is so successful and fast is because it does not work with structures and oganisation too much.

My suggestion is this. We already have candidates for 1.0.9

I think SimplePup would make a great Puppy109 Unofficial
Khl is working on a new Puppy109 candidate
Gnome Puppy109 candidate still going?
Nathans Grafpup 1.0.3 could also be thought of as Grafpup Puppy109?
Maybe MeanPuppy109 will make a new entrance?

Puppy109 - its unofficial - the community using it is the seal of approval . . .

[Trobin]

Agree with Barry, Puppy109 as name - we use it that way and we are not confused (speaking for myself) and in a while no one else will be. Even Windows users can count Confused (yes I have heard the rumours . . .)

I still like the old numbering system but so be it. I doubt that I'll be upgrading from 1.0.6, unless there is some major reason to do so, it won't matter to me much.

One of the reasons Puppy is so successful and fast is because it does not work with structures and oganisation too much.

Wouldn't that be because Puppy is mainly one person's vision with the input and help of others?

My suggestion is this. We already have candidates for 1.0.9

I think SimplePup would make a great Puppy109 Unofficial
Khl is working on a new Puppy109 candidate
Gnome Puppy109 candidate still going?
Nathans Grafpup 1.0.3 could also be thought of as Grafpup Puppy109?
Maybe MeanPuppy109 will make a new entrance?

Puppy109 - its unofficial - the community using it is the seal of approval . . .

I don't know if you could take a variation and consider it, even unofficially, as the next release. IMHO they branch out from the official line, appeal to and attract different segments of the community. That while they are important parts of the Puppy Evolutionary Tree they do not advance the official line. The Community using any one of the variations gives it the seal of approval, in it's own right.

Can I assume, then, that the last official release of the Puppy 1.0.x series was 1.0.8?

[klhrevolutionist]

Thank you lobster. To everybod, all I was and will do is fix up 1.0.8 and make some adjustments that would enchance an end user's experience. Itt is not official, that is unless those that are in charge even want to consider it.

I am an end user and I know how to remaster puppy. You may not think so from trying kde-puppy, but that was just a shot. As many might know I released an iso previous to kde a while back, and it was greeted nicely.

That being said, I think I can make a good candidate based upon those things which you know about plus my experience using puppy. Whether or not it is even considered for release is up to those in charge. I will of course pay attention to detail as well as other's recommendations.

Concerning gnome - puppy it is not possible with my lack of skill to figure out how to get around the long filenames which gnome has, this issue did not come around in kde-puppy and I have never come across this issue before. So for the time being I am afriad I cannot make this happen as I told some.