DEVELOPERS to CONTRIBUTORS (STAKEHOLDERS) :)

News, happenings
Message
Author
User avatar
ttuuxxx
Posts: 11171
Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
Contact:

Re: kernel development

#41 Post by ttuuxxx »

raffy wrote:ttuuxxx
I guess I'm the first coordinator for the next puppy Release. Smile
Well I have to start somewhere
It looks like PlatonicP, alcy and others are already into development for the next Puppy core:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=33461
Compiling the new 2.6.26 Kernel for puppy
well He only has 34 post and never compiled before, thats a very large task to compile a kernel even from the most experienced developer.
But I do applaud him for trying. But really what has that to do with Coordinating developers?
What I'm trying to do is organise the developers on task they want to do to and try to keeep to some sort of time frame for releases schedules, I was never going to try to compile a kernel for a main puppy release, plus we haven't figured out if we were going with t2 yet and if so Platonic kernel efforts wouldn't be needed because thats a part of T2. But if he is keen he could help out other ways.
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)

User avatar
Pizzasgood
Posts: 6183
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 20:28
Location: Knoxville, TN, USA

#42 Post by Pizzasgood »

I'm not trying to argue here, just want to point something out. I say this because I feel like maybe I've been argumentative lately. Last night I was on a roller coaster for the first time in a year and it made me realize just how down I've been lately. Even though the coaster seems to have stolen my cell phone, it was a very good ride and I'm happy again. :)
if so Platonic kernel efforts wouldn't be needed because thats a part of T2.
T2 helps automate compilation. AFAIK, it doesn't magically know which modules we do and do not need. In my experience with Gentoo, configuring the kernel is the tricky part. I had to recompile my kernel 10+ times before everything worked properly. I haven't messed with Puppy's kernel yet, but I know it needs a couple patches. That's another part that can become tricky, and T2 probably doesn't help much there either.

So IMHO, he could be a valuable resource to tap if he gets it working.

Who gets a say?
What do you want?
What what you like to contribute?

Who would you like to work with?
How should future collaboration be organised?
*I think anybody and everybody should be able to make suggestions, but a committee/council/group thing should vote on the direction Puppy should take. But how to decide who is in that group? I think that once the group is created, it would handle inducting new members on its own, based on merit. That leaves us with initializing the group. We could just do a "who wants to be in the group" question, and if nobody has a problem with the end result, call it the group. If there is a problem, maybe defer to Barry to get the initial group selected. Then, the group could induct any people it feels should have been allowed in.

*I want for Puppy to continue being a sub-100mb distro, to continue using a clean self-contained format like it does now with the filesystem images, and to maintain a lack of overall internal systems. Clarification on the last bit: In Puppy, if I want to change something I just change it. I don't have to worry if it will mess up the package manager, or goof up the tool that you're supposed to use to alter the boot process, or throw my desktop environment out of whack. If I want to replace a particular application, chances are no other things are set up to use it so I won't bork the whole system. Everything is mostly independent.

*I like the idea of Puppy loading into ram, along with the pfix=ram option and the .sfs file concepts. There are a lot of limitations though, particularly concerning what is and isn't loaded into ram, read-only .sfs files, getting to choose if things are saved, etc. So I want to play around with improving this stuff. That's more of a longer term goal though. In the nearer term I'd like to work on the stuff I mentioned earlier in this thread and on any other misc stuff I bump into. There have also been some repository and package-management related things that have come up over the years which it may be time to start considering in the not-quite-near future.

*I've generally just done my own thing. I don't have any preferences.

*I suggested a "task pool" earlier, where people would check a list of things that need doing along with priorities and decide what to work on from there (if they come up with something else needing doing they could either add it to the list or just do it themselves, unless it's some big thing that would need approval first). Another option would be to assign people general areas and have them maintain that portion, fixing all bugs they find and taking care of things that need doing. That way you could make sure no area gets ignored, but you'd also be constraining people to limited areas where they can contribute. Maybe allow trades and occasionally do a rotation to shake things up and bring fresh eyes into the areas.

Maybe a hybrid approach, where people have a region of Puppy that they give extra priority to, but can still take on jobs in other areas of Puppy if they don't have much else to do and there are a bunch of more important things elsewhere.
[size=75]Between depriving a man of one hour from his life and depriving him of his life there exists only a difference of degree. --Muad'Dib[/size]
[img]http://www.browserloadofcoolness.com/sig.png[/img]

Mic67

#43 Post by Mic67 »

I recall this quote from a sailing forum:

"The earth was not created by a committee"

Nor was puppy.

mic67

User avatar
alienjeff
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sat 08 Jul 2006, 20:19
Location: Winsted, CT - USA

#44 Post by alienjeff »

ttuuxxx wrote:
HairyWill wrote: Who gets a say? I think we all should

<snip>

How should future collaboration be organised? Simple Vote via locked forum where only a select list of trusted individuals have a vote.
So everyone gets a "say," but "only" a "select" list of "trusted" individuals get to vote?

How arrogantly clever, ttuuxxx!
[size=84][i]hangout:[/i] ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]

Trobin
Posts: 968
Joined: Fri 19 Aug 2005, 03:16
Location: BC Canada

#45 Post by Trobin »

alienjeff wrote:
ttuuxxx wrote:
HairyWill wrote: Who gets a say? I think we all should

<snip>

How should future collaboration be organised? Simple Vote via locked forum where only a select list of trusted individuals have a vote.
So everyone gets a "say," but "only" a "select" list of "trusted" individuals get to vote?

How arrogantly clever, ttuuxxx!
Well AJ, how would you do it?
[url]http://speakpup.blogspot.com[/url]

John Doe
Posts: 1681
Joined: Mon 01 Aug 2005, 04:46
Location: Michigan, US

#46 Post by John Doe »

alienjeff wrote:
ttuuxxx wrote:
HairyWill wrote: Who gets a say? I think we all should

<snip>

How should future collaboration be organised? Simple Vote via locked forum where only a select list of trusted individuals have a vote.
So everyone gets a "say," but "only" a "select" list of "trusted" individuals get to vote?

How arrogantly clever, ttuuxxx!
almost like watching a benign dictatorship mold into a democratically labeled communist organization, isn't it.

User avatar
Lobster
Official Crustacean
Posts: 15522
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
Location: Paradox Realm
Contact:

#47 Post by Lobster »

At the moment, Puppy is developer led.

That is where it can stay if we have a developer willing to put 4.2 together. This will mean most of the work will be with the Developer (Barry has been given a LOT more coding help from others lately).

The 4.2 developer will have to understand coding and how to put together an ISO base but does not necessarily have to do much coding themselves. It is still a lot of work, just updating packages etc.

By using a release ISO often model (if possible), we can test and only would lose a weeks work if say the ISO was uploaded regularly and a need to change developers occurred (unlikely but possible) . . .

This is the preferred model that Barry used and was used in the successful community editions that came to fruition as 'official' Puppy releases.. An extreme example of this was Puppy Linux 2.03. Hacao did ALL the coding, added Open Office, released one test version and then the final Official Puppy version.

I keep getting this impression that some people want to 'change everything',
in fact small incremental changes can be added as they become available on the forum. So all that is needed for 4.2 is someone prepared to put together what IS available..

People I know are capable of this from past experience are BarryK, MU, Pizzasgood, John Murgha, Warren, Nathan, Hacao, Raffy, Tronkel and some of the Puplet creators who want to 'step up a notch'

So it is up to one of those to step forward and say yes I will have a go.

Maybe BarryK will surprise us with a plan - he often does ;)
Puppy Raspup 8.2Final 8)
Puppy Links Page http://www.smokey01.com/bruceb/puppy.html :D

User avatar
tronkel
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri 30 Sep 2005, 11:27
Location: Vienna Austria
Contact:

#48 Post by tronkel »

Lobster wrote:
So it is up to one of those to step forward and say yes I will have a go.
Problem is, people who really understand what it takes to "have a go" know exactly what is involved in trying to step into Barry's shoes.

Unquantifiable hours compiling, scripting, testing, bug tracing, repair and thinking out new innovations. Building an ISO takes about 10 mins on a medium speed machine using Unleashed. This is the easy bit - anyone can do it - you don't need to be much of a developer for that. On the other hand, building on OS from scratch is a job for heavyweight developers only.

We don't actually have anyone who can do what Barry has done though. The time factor alone would put most people off - even if they had the will and the expertise to get the job done.

With Barry retiring, the Puppy project is in "damage limitation mode". This means, that if the project is to survive into the future, difficult decisions will need to be taken and flexibility will also be required. We may have to consider options that were never necessary in the past, simply because Barry did everything necessary to produce the all-important base versions - without which there would be no Puplets CE's etc.

A project committee may well be the only temporary solution available, in order to ensure that the project doesn't keel over. In the meantime, we should be looking round to try to find a Chief Implementer-cum-Project Director who is worthy of the task. I don't believe there is anyone within the community at present, who has such a track record and who also has the time to devote to the task.
Last edited by tronkel on Sun 21 Sep 2008, 09:50, edited 4 times in total.

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

The young ones

#49 Post by raffy »

I vote for the young ones to have important roles in the development of Puppy Linux. The really young ones here are students, like Pizzasgood, cb88, SirDuncan, {please add names that I missed}...

ttuuxxx is quite young, too, but that's compared to the old me. :) He will still be the most prolific puplet and package creator no matter who we choose as leader.

When youth is combined with merit (contributions to Puppy development), probably Pizzasgood will easily top the list, as he has been contributing to Puppy development since his high school days. FYI, his latest completed project is PCPuppyOS, a commercial-grade puplet.

Pizzasgood is already used to managing affairs in Puppy - note that he has high privileges in this forum, and is able to moderate difficult discussions. He can also easily shift gears to publishing a blog, as he keeps his own website.

Many regulars in this community know how to be selfless, and would easily get into the routine of supporting a leader, while also steering/influencing others into a favored direction of development. This will not be difficult as the Puppy ideals are clear: more computing power with less resources.

PG (ok, I shortened the name) is already used to scanning this forum for new developments, so all he has to do is write notes about the direction Puppy is taking, and to request help by volunteers in certain areas of development.

Meantime, the community will be happily chugging along in innovative work, and what it produces may or may not get into the official Puppy.

Development will not be about committees, but about innovations that are put together by a leader, to build one official version.
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

User avatar
Lobster
Official Crustacean
Posts: 15522
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
Location: Paradox Realm
Contact:

#50 Post by Lobster »

My general policy with developers is to keep out of their way and let them get on with their magic.

Pizzasgood has a great attitude and I would love him to do it . . . even if it takes him 6 months to a year I know he can deliver . . .

You can find an old interview with him here:
http://tmxxine.com/wik/wikka.php?wakka=PizzasGood

Pizzasgood has a proven record for diplomacy, skill, innovation and flexibility.

'There is another' [said in my best yoda voice]
However when I ask about CE versions - 'no time.'
No harm in asking again.
Pizzasgood are you up for it? :)

One of the strangest experiences was when I had Vector Linux on my HD (it was meant to be used for developers and I was role playing . . . :wink:

I managed to run and use Vector Linux programs from the Puppy CD
This has now been formalised in the 'underdog' system - that I know very little about. Is there any traction in this route?
Puppy Raspup 8.2Final 8)
Puppy Links Page http://www.smokey01.com/bruceb/puppy.html :D

User avatar
tronkel
Posts: 1116
Joined: Fri 30 Sep 2005, 11:27
Location: Vienna Austria
Contact:

#51 Post by tronkel »

What about re-visiting the idea that someone in the forum had (I've forgotten who it was), about encouraging computing faculties at universities to use Puppy as a basis for assignments?

I remember that Ttuuxxx seemed to be against the idea at the time, but it needs further consideration in the light of Barry's retirement nevertheless IMHO.

The idea is that the students, (under or post-grad) could develop or fix some aspect of the Puppy OS as an assignment for their Operating Systems module in their course. This could have the following benefits for the Puppy project:

1. It would further promote awareness of the Puppy OS
2. If the students can produce useful fixes/addons to the system, these could be integrated into Puppy, if deemed suitable and/or useful by whoever/whatever is in charge of Puppy at the time.
3. This could save time and effort and probably produce innovative ideas - something that is badly needed for the base versions.

This wouldn't mean giving up any control of Puppy to any university whatsoever - that would continue as normal.

@lobster:

I always liked Underdog myself - it was fun. I'll have to check to see if it still there in Puppy 4 series.

I doubt if making small incremental changes to 4.1 base version and calling it a 4.2 can be justified though. There is no particular problem with doing that as such, but such an updated version would be better designated as a CE, Puplet, or Revision addition rather than as a base version. Base versions always contain more under-the- hood upgrades or fixes. This is where the above idea about Uni assignments could come in handy. Fixes from the research done here, if suitable, could be included in a base Puppy version.
Life is too short to spend it in front of a computer

User avatar
Lobster
Official Crustacean
Posts: 15522
Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
Location: Paradox Realm
Contact:

#52 Post by Lobster »

encouraging computing faculties at universities
I think it is a great idea Jack (Tronkel). After our PSIP (or was it Skype) conversation I looked for the link but could not find it . . .

I will get on to the Open University people (who should OF COURSE be using Open Software) - I started the SOUL page when I found they did not support Linux
http://tmxxine.com/wik/wikka.php?wakka=LinuxOU

I managed to do a short course only using Linux (Puppy in fact)
and it was great

I believe HairyWill works at a University - maybe he can start teaching Linux instead of MS or perhaps this would be possible with specialized courses?
Puppy Raspup 8.2Final 8)
Puppy Links Page http://www.smokey01.com/bruceb/puppy.html :D

bugman

#53 Post by bugman »

one of the best things about puppy has always been that it is inclusive

rather than divisive

i would like to see puppy remain open and friendly

please remember this when picking a [ugly word alert] 'leader'

that being said, i think my pizza is here

8)

User avatar
playdayz
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri 25 Apr 2008, 18:57

A Litter of Puppies?

#54 Post by playdayz »

I think when Barry started Puppy he did not ask a committee the best way to structure the organization. He just did it. And the people who wanted to follow followed.

That is what I love about the open source world, people follow voluntarily, leaders are chosen because people think they are worth following. Hey bugman, i first wrote that this was the way the Lakota did it also--they followed who they chose for the task at hand. The "Big Chief" was an invention of the Europeans to have someone to sign the land over to them.

Is that what is going to happen here anyway, that we each follow who we choose to follow? If so, why not accept it. Puppy is Barry. Now let us see who else has a clear vision and the wherewithal to make it happen and to interest others in it. ttuuxxx has a clear vision and he says he has the time to make it happen; he has been prolific with Additional Software. cb88 also seems to have a clear vision which is not compatible with ttuuxxx's. Is this a bad thing? Why do not they and others state their visions and then we (the rest of us) put our energies where we choose to put our energies. Would a litter of puppies be a good thing, and a worthwhile gesture of honor to BarryK.

Could we use this site or the 0rg site to birth those new puppies? Natural selection will operate of course.

Speaking of 4.2, I would hope that perhaps we could test 4.1, debug it, and refine it as 4.2 in another gesture to Barry, to make it as good as it can be and a worthy progentitor to the puppies to come??? I woud put some energy into that.

bugman

#55 Post by bugman »

i like yer thinking, playdayz

nothing but puplets

each on its own path

but helping each other grow through central collective sites such as the forum and wiki

Trobin
Posts: 968
Joined: Fri 19 Aug 2005, 03:16
Location: BC Canada

#56 Post by Trobin »

So what you are saying is that once Barry steps aside development on the core Puppy should cease?
[url]http://speakpup.blogspot.com[/url]

bugman

#57 Post by bugman »

i am not opposed to the idea

but then again i'm still using 1.07

newer puppies have left my hardware behind

[lowest common demominator]

in a cloud of puplets, a beard of stars, a flock of seagulls


User avatar
playdayz
Posts: 3799
Joined: Fri 25 Apr 2008, 18:57

Not necessarily Trobin

#58 Post by playdayz »

I don't know Trobin, I wan't thinking of that necessarily, I would like to see 4.1 refined and debugged and polished for 4.2, and that is at least several months and then several months for 4.2 on its own. Maybe things would be clearer by then about the way to proceed. But I think someone or a group with a vision would want to pursue that vision and what do we do if there are two or three people and groups that have incompatible visions and all wanted to have a claim on Puppy? That is what it looks like to me now.

Ah, let's say, I do want to see Puppy 4.1/2 continue to be developed, but perhaps in three or more different ways. Would there still be a Puppy? Yes. Barry's. The new pups could have dog names to show their heritage.

raffy
Posts: 4798
Joined: Wed 25 May 2005, 12:20
Location: Manila

paths

#59 Post by raffy »

Let us try some possible paths:

A - mainstream Puppy (cutting-edge core);

B - Puppy anchored on a big brother distro (3.xx?);

C - Puppy optimized for single-core/old PCs (2.xx?);

D - Puppy for Ultra Mobile PCs (Barry's new niche).

Each of these paths would be moving forward based on innovations created and collected through the community sites, and cross-fertilize each other.
Puppy user since Oct 2004. Want FreeOffice? [url=http://puppylinux.info/topic/freeoffice-2012-sfs]Get the sfs (English only)[/url].

User avatar
alienjeff
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sat 08 Jul 2006, 20:19
Location: Winsted, CT - USA

Re: paths

#60 Post by alienjeff »

raffy wrote:Each of these paths would be moving forward based on innovations created and collected through the community sites, and cross-fertilize each other.
Fertilize? Nice visual ...
[size=84][i]hangout:[/i] ##b0rked on irc.freenode.net
[i]diversion:[/i] [url]http://alienjeff.net[/url] - visit The Fringe
[i]quote:[/i] "The foundation of authority is based upon the consent of the people." - Thomas Hooker[/size]

Post Reply