Puppy Linux Discussion Forum Forum Index Puppy Linux Discussion Forum
Puppy HOME page : puppylinux.com
"THE" alternative forum : puppylinux.info
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The time now is Sat 25 Oct 2014, 11:06
All times are UTC - 4
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
Collaborating as a team or group for Puppy good
Moderators: Flash, Ian, JohnMurga
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
Page 6 of 9 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Author Message
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Tue 11 Dec 2012, 15:39    Post_subject:  

gcmartin wrote:

P.S. The notion that someone passed earlier about my working on teamed projects....dispell it. I have, more that you'll know.


oh....
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
gcmartin

Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 4368
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Tue 11 Dec 2012, 16:01    Post_subject:  

jpeps wrote:
gcmartin wrote:

P.S. The notion that someone passed earlier about my working on teamed projects....dispell it. I have, more that you'll know.
oh....
That's it? That's all you could display of interest???
Also wrote:
..but hey....if you think you can produce a better Puppy by adopting "a radical new approach" than that which has evolved, we all await the final product. I was attracted to Puppy linux specifically because individuals could create and post anything here, without having to go through some team of designated authorities.
I envision we are trying to see if there is a way of using our technology and our resources to make for a simple easy method for us to create something of value to the community....in a comfortable team fashion, where the challenges and results are visible, easily understood and simple to bring whatever useful efforts together to the table.

I was hoping that any contributions you/any could have would be joined, should there be a structure available.

Here to help

_________________
Get ACTIVE Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
3 Different Puppy Search Engine or use DogPile
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Q5sys


Joined: 11 Dec 2008
Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Tue 11 Dec 2012, 19:40    Post_subject:  

gcmartin wrote:
There seems to be a high frequency of people feeling that in a group there is to be people telling others what to do.
I don't see this expectation (unless of course you are looking at past attempts of working together). I would think that those collaborating with each other would have respect and work together understanding that what contribution they can make would be beneficial to all for the goal.

All we have to go on is what we have seen from past attempts at working together. I for one cannot see the future. The only thing I have to go on is what I have seen in the past when there is an attempt at 'collaboration' between coders and non coders for designing a release. I dont think the coders have too much of a problem collaborating with each other, there are plenty of examples of that on the forum. However during the 'coding phase' there's not much non-coders can do. Their assistance doesn't really come into play until the testing phase when they can help find bugs. What I have seen in the past, and thus the only thing I can base my opinions on... is that when non-coders try to get involved in the coding phase with their recommendations... the moment its not what the coder had in mind; usually everything falls apart. If its along the same lines as what the coder had intended or was invisioning, then its not a problem. While I can only speak for myself, but I probably am not the only one... when I am coding something and someone comes along trying to convince me to do it another way... it comes across like this "Hey, I know you are doing all this work and I know you arent getting anything for it, but I want you to stop doing it the way you want, and do it the way I want.... you know since I'm sitting on my butt not helping in anyway."

Now the way the message is presented also has a lot to do with it. If someone comes along and says 'hey I was thinking about something and I was wondering if there was a reason you are doing X instead of Y. Because Y could be really helpful'. If someone approached it with that method I'd probably be way more receptive and even if I choose not to do it their way, I am given the opportunity to be able to explain WHY Im doing X instead of Y and possibly help them learn something along the way.


gcmartin wrote:
I envision we are trying to see if there is a way of using our technology and our resources to make for a simple easy method for us to create something of value to the community....in a comfortable team fashion, where the challenges and results are visible, easily understood and simple to bring whatever useful efforts together to the table.


I dont think you are intending this... but when you say things like that... it sounds alot like you are trying to make the claim that we havent created something of value for the community in the past with our current methods. Our current method has challanges and results are visible as well... after all look at all the development that has taken place without this idealistic dream of collaboration.
I really hope you arent trying to say that. If you were, i'd be saddened by your opinions on what we have accomplished so far. In the past, when people have brought this issue up, they usually have been looking down on the communities past accomplishments; which may lend to some peoples harsh reaction to this concept.

I encourage you to pursue this idea if you feel it will work, but dont expect a warm and fuzzy reception considering the way this has gone in the past. If you are able to get a core set of coders that will be willing to take up your suggestion model of designing a release... run with it.

_________________



Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
p310don

Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 720
Location: Brisbane, Australia

PostPosted: Tue 11 Dec 2012, 23:52    Post_subject:  

I've been lurking this thread, as gcmartin's concept alludes to something that I've been wanting to see for the good of Puppy development and promotion.

Let me start by saying, I love Puppy and greatly appreciate the work that is done by everyone who makes it, tests it, distributes it etc.

What I do find frustrating about Puppy is its lack of co-ordination / collaboration. Sometimes there are great features in older puplets that don't always get carried over to newer versions. I love the basic structure of Puppy, and how it all works so well on so much hardware. It's Barry's basic design, and other's contributions that make this great.

Looking at the broader Linux world, Puppy has its detractors and denigrators. There is of course the "run as root" problems that other perceive to be a problem. (BS) But the one that often annoys me is that Puppy is seen as a hobby / toy OS that isn't suited to proper use, or at best a rescue OS. I exclusively use Puppy at home, and I'm sure many people, coders, developers and users alike, also only use Puppy. I find it covers all the tasks I want to do. (windoze on virtualbox in puppy helps sometimes)

My personal view is that for Puppy to get past this sort of talk it needs to evolve, perhaps with a big leap somewhere along the way.

Saluki is mentioned a few times in this thread, and I am currently using it myself. As a user, I have found it to be nice and easy. I do also see it as being almost not a Puppy with its marked difference in appearance to other Pups out there. Having said that, I believe, looking at its respecting thread, that it is one of the most popular Puplets.

Jemimah has created a great version of Puppy there, however, with her busy-ness with her work, the ball has been dropped, so to speak, with Saluki, which is where the Carolina guys have picked up.

If there was a team of developers with Saluki, rather that just one very talented person, Saluki could still be active.

This example is seen with other open source projects, as well as Puppies.

Now the hard part.

How would anyone implement a collaboration system in the Puppy ecosystem, and to what detail would it go? Obviously if murga was a company, and all the forum members were paid employees it would be easy. q5sys, you do this, ttuuxxx you do that, 01micko get this done pemasu build that - and all of you have to get it done by 5pm, now get to work!! Well, that's not the case now, so to work as a group / team, it'd have to be on a project that people / developers WANT to be involved with.

My solution (if that's the right word) would be to start in the planning stage, identifying what people actually want, and then finding developers who want to create that. To find what people want, a popular / democratic vote seems like a good way to go.

Areas to vote on might include:

Hardware to design for? eg laptops, tablets, desktops, legacy hardware etc

Window Manager / file manager?

Browser suite?

Media Player?

Office software?

etc

And then after a period of voting / discussion, devise a definition of exactly what the outcomes of the project are.

Then, and only then, find the developers who have an interest in working on individual tasks as part of the greater product. In this model, if a developer can no longer participate for whatever reason, there is a chunk that can be taken over by someone else to continue to original, stated goal.

This all sound very big business, and as I said before, if this was a business, it would be easy. But this isn't a business, nobody here has any right to demand something be done by anyone. But, if we could create a system to achieve this, then it could be done.

Most important question first though I guess is:

WHO WANTS TO BE PART OF A TEAM TO MAKE A NEW PUPPY?
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
mavrothal


Joined: 24 Aug 2009
Posts: 1700

PostPosted: Wed 12 Dec 2012, 01:45    Post_subject:  

jamesbond wrote:
I think we have experimented with this before Smile

Saluki, the brainstorming and ideas http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=59496 and http://puppylinux.org/wikka/Puppy6.
Saluki, the puplet http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=73687.


I'm not sure what this suppose to teach us but revisiting those links is striking how the discussion and the pupplet are so far apart!
I think the reason for that was nailed by Jemimah herself early on in the previous discussions
jemimah wrote:
IMO, there is only one important question on the table here. Are there multiple people with the skill, spare time, and communication skills who want to work together to build something great from the ground up.

If not, that's fine. Puppy will continue the way it always has.

Two years later is clear that the answer is a sound "No"

As a matter of fact diverging even a little from mainstream woof-puppy means you make something different.
Fatdog and Saluki are good examples of that (and independent entries in distrowatch).
Diverge more and you just drop off the radar (see PupNGo and Subito).

So the new Puppy, is going to be what Barry will say it is and built the way Barry will say it will.
I certainly do not imply that BK is an obstacle in Puppy progress.
I rather suggest that the (group of) person(s) that could develop puppy further, has not been identified by Barry yet.

The fact is that what we call "developers" or "coders" are in their majority what mainstream distros call "packagers" or "release managers" at best. ie they put together available code with the minimal possible modification.
Building an OS from the ground up needs what jemimah quoted above but with Barry's seal of approval to be a "Puppy" or without it to be a "Stray".

So all this discussion looks like group therapy I'm afraid...

_________________
Kids all over the world go around with an XO laptop. They deserve one puppy (or many) too Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
jamesbond

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2230
Location: The Blue Marble

PostPosted: Wed 12 Dec 2012, 06:39    Post_subject:  

mavrothal wrote:
I'm not sure what this suppose to teach us but revisiting those links is striking how the discussion and the pupplet are so far apart!

You nailed it - this and all your previous posts.

Just to summarise:

Saluki-the-idea shows that collaboration at "ideas" level is not a problem at all.
Saluki-the-puplet shows that when it comes to implementation, it's totally different matter.

Why is a Puppy designed by wisdom of The Crowd run only by One Person?
Why didn't we see people rushing to claim their role in building Puppy for the Common Good?
(and I don't mean those who create pet packages for Saluki - I mean people who are responsible to maintain the *core* component of Saluki-the-puplet - like what Barry does with woof. Those people who would be able to continue Saluki-the-puplet even if / when Jemimah has to be absent for whatever reason.)

My take on the reason is this (from the same post quoted by mavrothal)
jemimah wrote:
The fact is, no two people have exactly the same vision. If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself. Teamwork is compromise.


People come to Puppy and this forum for many different reasons. We use Puppy in different ways. Sometimes diametrically opposite.
Need proof? Just answer this without causing a flame war: "What is the web browser that should be included by default?"
That is the real reason why we have an explosion of puplets (and Linux distros in general) - and little, if any, hope of getting the One Puppy to rule them all.
Note that even Saluki-the-idea thread didn't end in any coherent conclusion or agreement.

But all is not lost. "Puppy for Common Good" does not need to be the Puppy to rule all puppies.
If you lower your sights and realise that "Puppy for Common Good" is just one of the many puplets - your chance of success only depends on how you sell the vision and attract people with the right skills. You don't need to attract all of them. Just enough to get it started and going. That's how it works in Valve. That's how it works around here.

I wish you good luck on your enterprise.

EDIT: typo.

_________________
Fatdog64, Slacko and Puppeee user. Puppy user since 2.13.
Contributed Fatdog64 packages thread
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
cthisbear

Joined: 29 Jan 2006
Posts: 3434
Location: Sydney Australia

PostPosted: Wed 12 Dec 2012, 06:51    Post_subject:  

" you know since I'm sitting on my butt not helping in anyway."

These people reading my emails...

Chris.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Wed 12 Dec 2012, 13:33    Post_subject:  

jamesbond wrote:


Why is a Puppy designed by wisdom of The Crowd run only by One Person?
Why didn't we see people rushing to claim their role in building Puppy for the Common Good?


The "Common Good" ?? ....sounds like some naive, sophomoric political propaganda.

Obviously it's useless to start taking votes on what constitutes the "Common Good." There is no Common Good. You like one browser, I like another...the end..

There are plenty of excellent linux projects currently in ongoing development for anyone who seriously wants to contribute. Linux is more for innovative people who want do things a little differently.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
jamesbond

Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2230
Location: The Blue Marble

PostPosted: Wed 12 Dec 2012, 18:41    Post_subject:  

jpeps wrote:
The "Common Good" ?? ....sounds like some naive, sophomoric political propaganda.

It wasn't exactly my word. From the very first post of this thread:
Quote:
... to achieve something for Puppy good... er, I mean 'Public Good'.


Quote:
Obviously it's useless to start taking votes on what constitutes the "Common Good." There is no Common Good. You like one browser, I like another...the end..

Exactly my point.

_________________
Fatdog64, Slacko and Puppeee user. Puppy user since 2.13.
Contributed Fatdog64 packages thread
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Q5sys


Joined: 11 Dec 2008
Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Wed 12 Dec 2012, 19:19    Post_subject:  

jamesbond wrote:

Why didn't we see people rushing to claim their role in building Puppy for the Common Good?


I read this and instantly thought of the old line:

"Those who can't do... coach."

Which then reminded me of the wonderful Budweiser bit on this...
Quote:
They say those who can't play coach
Apparently those who can't coach...
sit 30 rows back, shirtless, shouting obscenities.


Which made me laugh and I decided to share that with everyone. lol
(Now bringing humor to the table... that's real collaboration, haha)

_________________



Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Wed 12 Dec 2012, 22:34    Post_subject:  

jamesbond wrote:
jpeps wrote:
The "Common Good" ?? ....sounds like some naive, sophomoric political propaganda.

It wasn't exactly my word. From the very first post of this thread:
Quote:
... to achieve something for Puppy good... er, I mean 'Public Good'.

I had assumed you were paraphrasing gcmartin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
gcmartin

Joined: 14 Oct 2005
Posts: 4368
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Thu 13 Dec 2012, 15:17    Post_subject:  

Quote:
...
Saluki-the-idea shows that collaboration at "ideas" level is not a problem at all.
Saluki-the-puplet shows that when it comes to implementation, it's totally different matter. ...
Agreed. That's what we are discussing. Can we not just envision whether this is reasonable, but to develop an approach where we demonstrate that taking this to a little different level is reasonable, beneficial, and obvious.

If the approach we perfect performs usefully, we have demonstrated how loose-knit teaming (collaboration) works to generate an accomplishment. Be aware, that what is shown, above, is that there is the normal process of building something of value. The actual production DID, in fact, filter down into a single entity, but, could that process also have been a multitude of commoners, rather various contributers addressing the same goal, instead of just one carrying the full load?

Everyone here is adding pieces to this in their own way. But, step back a moment and I think each of us can see beneficial approaches. Our past was developed without the benefit of the tools, and ability we have in front of us, today. The technology has advanced with tools we never thought possible 20 years ago. We brought forth the practices of 20 years ago with us today. Now, we can see that "maybe" ...

Here to help
Edited: changed "commoners" to "various contributers addressing the same goal" in line with a suggestion.

_________________
Get ACTIVE Create Circles; Do those good things which benefit people's needs!
We are all related ... Its time to show that we know this!
3 Different Puppy Search Engine or use DogPile

Edited_times_total
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
jpeps

Joined: 31 May 2008
Posts: 3220

PostPosted: Thu 13 Dec 2012, 15:52    Post_subject:  

gcmartin wrote:
The actual production DID, in fact, filter down into a single entity, but, could that process also have been a multitude of commoners instead of just one carrying the full load?


multitude of commoners?
Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message 
Q5sys


Joined: 11 Dec 2008
Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Thu 13 Dec 2012, 19:28    Post_subject:  

jpeps wrote:
gcmartin wrote:
The actual production DID, in fact, filter down into a single entity, but, could that process also have been a multitude of commoners instead of just one carrying the full load?


multitude of commoners?


Did I just wake up in Soviet Russia?

EDIT: Ah, I see the word choice was changed.

_________________



Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Q5sys


Joined: 11 Dec 2008
Posts: 1073

PostPosted: Thu 13 Dec 2012, 19:34    Post_subject:  

gcmartin wrote:
Everyone here is adding pieces to this in their own way. But, step back a moment and I think each of us can see beneficial approaches. Our past was developed without the benefit of the tools, and ability we have in front of us, today. The technology has advanced with tools we never thought possible 20 years ago. We brought forth the practices of 20 years ago with us today. Now, we can see that "maybe" ...


Very eloquently spoken... however doesn't really mean much. Lets look at the past 20 years of Linux development... and see what we find...
Yup what I thought, people doing it the way they feel is best, and when someone disagreed... they went and did it the way they wanted.
That's how Puppy came to be! If it weren't for this attitude none of us would be there. Way back in the day Barry saw linux going one direction and he had an idea to go another. Instead of trying to rally people around and change the direction of the current linux development... he went his own direction, and look what it's spawned.
This forum has over 21000 users, and over 600000 "articles"... The status-quo seems to be working fine. The do-o-cracy method has been working great.

_________________



Back to top
View user's profile Send_private_message Visit_website 
Display_posts:   Sort by:   
Page 6 of 9 Posts_count   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
Post_new_topic   Reply_to_topic View_previous_topic :: View_next_topic
 Forum index » Taking the Puppy out for a walk » Announcements
Jump to:  

Rules_post_cannot
Rules_reply_cannot
Rules_edit_cannot
Rules_delete_cannot
Rules_vote_cannot
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
[ Time: 0.1312s ][ Queries: 12 (0.0056s) ][ GZIP on ]