Puppy 5.0 "New Hope"

[Caneri]

Yup..me too Trobin..but you see I'm not worried about the changes. I agree with Barry when he says Puppy will get better and better.

@ ALL,

There is one thing you should consider that seems to be missing in these threads.

If negative takes over positive then you can surely bet on the demise of any project.

I would like to say that to those that complain about John Murga's forum, or fret about Puppy, and if that BarryK will dump this and retire to some unknown world that I've never heard of, take another look and stop to think that your rants/complaints may entice John Murga and BarryK to make it come true and truly dump this forum and the distro...so relax and enjoy the process. I didn't see any obituary's here..you really have no choice in the matter nor do I..but it's still Puppy and will remain Puppy...sheesh.

Best,
Eric

EDIT: @Will,
You posted whist I was typing.
Long live anarchy...eventually it works into a direction that is usually a good one once the fluff is blown away.

[Trobin]

Anarchy could be considered a very elegant solution to the problem. A period of 'forking' madness could possibly lead to new allegences and long term stability. This scenario would favour those whose puppy producing skills could out live a period of natural selection. Ultimately cooperative behaviour might superceed this. Anarchy is not very good for politicians, middle management and project coordinators!

Perhaps those that are vying for top job should be asked to put together a puplet that incorporates some of their ideas.

[ttuuxxx]

ttuuxxx

A question we might all step back and consider.
Why do I want a release of puppy after 4.1?
2) better software functionality (file format compatability)
3) better software usability
4) improved hardware suppport
5) better looks
6) better support for new users/windows refugees
7) other

If the next release doesn't offer #3 there is very little reason for me to bother upgrading..

I like 2,3,4,5,6,7

Ok guys this is what Barry said http://www.puppylinux.org/community/barrys-blog
"
Binary compatibility with a major distro
I'm thinking that after 4.1 and 4.2, it might be wise to move back to binary compatibility with one of the major distros. It is so incredibly time consuming compiling packages. And, you have probably noticed how many times I am recompiling the 2.6.25.x kernel. It is better to leverage off all the hard work that goes into a major distro I think.

After releasing 4.1 and shifting one step closer to retirement, I will be working on my own puplet that targets one or more of the baby laptops. I might reconstruct Unleashed and the 'devx' based on packages from a major distro -- but not necessarily Slackware, perhaps the upcoming Ubuntu 8.10 'Intrepid'. What do you think about choice of distro?

If I do rebuild Unleashed and devx, I'll make it available of course, if the main Puppy developers want to adopt it. "

Can you say"Hell Ya"

Ask yourself. if he Barry isn't sticking with the 4.0 series then why are we?
The 3 series was always my version of choice, but the 4.0 slowly grew on me, I don't see why we would have another community edition for 4.2 that we can put together with packages, and at the same time start preparing for 5.0. Shouldn't we be on the same page as Barry or 6-12 months behind?

Tronkel has informed me that he would like to continue on the community edition 3 and as time permits start on a community edition for 4.1ce, So it won't be produced quickly because he does work and have other obligations but never the less it could be done
Now that sounds like 4.1ce is covered.

So wouldn't the next obvious step would be move on to 5.0

If not ok, if so ok, really its about progress and not regress.
ttuuxxx

[tronkel]

ttuuxxx wrote:

Now that sounds like 4.2 is covered.

A base version called 4.2 is most certainly NOT covered unless Barry builds this. The community has no-one at present who can build ANY base version to Barry's standards.


As in previous times, I could make a derivative based on a final Barry 4.1 base version. Even If that is the case and such a derivative gets built by me, in no way should it be construed as being a base 4.2 and certainly not a 5.0 nor even a 4.1 revisited. It would simply be another face-lifted base version amongst the many that have been built in the last few years by numerous wannabe Joe C. Developer (s)

[Béèm]

I think there is no rush to go ahead too quickly.
Seeing the n° of issues raised in the Bug threads, there is plenty to work on to have finally an error free 4.1 before going to 4.2 or 5.0
A lot of the issues raised in the bug threads seem not to be addressed.

In fact I have raised several times in several bug threads issues on I had an answer of only one person.

One of the issues if for me a real show stopper. SeaMonkey isn't working correctly anymore concerning file download ans saving.

After all if feedback is asked, given and not addressed what faith will there be left in the program?

Just my 2 cents.

BTW this will not deter me to try to help others if I can with the knowledge I have.

[bugman]

Puppy 5.0 . . . No. Not yet. I really think that jumping another series so soon is a bad idea. Look at this: 2.12, 2.13, 2.14, 2.16, 2.17, 3.00, 3.01, 4.00, 3.02, 4.10, 5.00 - do you see the problem? You're getting ahead of yourself, and the community. Let's wait for a final of 4.10, then start working on 4.20. We need to get our bearings and work out our development system before we tackle a big enough change to warrant a series version increase.

put the 1.x series in there and the trend looks even worse

get a really great 4.x and then think about 5

i like the idea i saw somewhere about people testing new/crazy things in puplets and then folding those that work back into the main release

[i think that's what someone said]

a sort of 'functional democracy'

[Brandon]

Yes, anarchy could be good, everyone throws their best out and the best "runs" the show.

[big_bass]

The most important safeguards are already in place
for open source

http://www.opensource.org/docs/definition.php

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups

The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.

Rationale: In order to get the maximum benefit from the process, the maximum diversity of persons and groups should be equally eligible to contribute to open sources. Therefore we forbid any open-source license from locking anybody out of the process.

.

big_bass

[Trobin]

What precisely does that mean?

[big_bass]

What precisely does that mean?

lets stay productive
and follow the open source
rules

they are a safe guard to
puppy growing by
the community

and prevent evil take over
for selfish personal reasons
whatever they may be
real or imagined

big_bass

[Trobin]

That did not come anywhere close to answering my question.

If I put Alpine into Speak Pup while another person suggests I use Mutt or Finch an I discriminating against thpose people?

[big_bass]

That did not come anywhere close to answering my question.

If I put Alpine into Speak Pup while another person suggests I use Mutt or Finch an I discriminating against thpose people?

If you were Barry (no)

if you build your own puplet and follow Barry's guide lines (no)

most all of these types of questions have already been answered if you wish to investigate

at the 90% mark close to the bottom of the page
http://www.puppylinux.com/faq.htm

http://www.puppylinux.com/development/p ... tement.htm
http://www.puppylinux.com/news/news202- ... ppy_distro

and any real legal concerns should be addressed to Barry
not me

big_bass

[Trobin]

So if I follow the rules, give Barry credit for creating Puppy, make sure that my puplet is sufficiently differentiated from mainstream puppy then I am not discrtiminating against anyone if I use my choice of programs rather than theirs.

I wasn't asking about any legal concerns. I wanted clarification on the statement about discrimination.

[panzerpuppy]

No,4.1 won't be the last official version. We will definitely see another (4.2) release by BarryK,with major updates [Xorg 4.2/XServer with the latest MESA (the most important upgrade ever),latest ALSA 1.0.18,a fixed version of XINE,a nightly build of Seamonkey 2.0 (much better than the current one),Flash 10,SANE,etc.]

After that,it's time for the community to work on Puppy 5.0,while Barry continues with his UniPup project.


Here's some stuff I'd like to see in Puppy 5.0:

* Kernel optimized for low-latency multimedia use (as in Ubuntu Studio)
* DVD-RAM and UDF support out of the box
* HD and beyond-HD resolution support for Xvesa and Xorg:
- 1792x1344, 1920x1440 and 2048x1536 (Standard Ratio)
- 1920x1080, 1920x1200 and 2560x1600 (Widescreen)
Even with the latest version,Puppy is still limited to 1600x1200
* Seamonkey being replaced with Opera (Opera > Seamonkey > Firefox)
* A CPU usage meter in the systray instead of that somewhat useless thread count indicator
* XnView MP ftp://ftp2.xnview.com/xnview/misc/XnViewMP-linux.tgz (a brand new Qt4 Linux version !) as an image viewer instead of Fotox
* The good old MUT mount interface with more options
* RP-PPPOE with the official GUI (which includes the meter),not Barry's stripped implementation.
* A good bandwidth/traffic meter (or even a patched XNetLoad) that works with PPP connections (XNetLoad doesn't detect any PPP connections in Puppy 4,works great in 2.xx)
* +1 for all those crappy calculators replaced with a single good one, i.e. Galculator.I prefer having one good app for each task,instead of several not-so-good ones.
* XArchive replaced by a much better archiver that's not awfully slow when scanning the archive (7-zip does this part instantly), can extract individual files without creating the source directories (the most annoying thing I ever saw in a file archiver), can open .7z (a must),.RAR,ACE (and .PET archives without renaming them to .tgz)
* XINE patched or replaced by a player that has OpenGL (multitextured) video output,so all users can have accelerated fullscreen video playback. Xv doesn't work on most cards and XShm is terribly slow.
* The latest version of Qt4 (as standard) in the ISO,including the OpenGL libs and qtconfig
* Include Firelog,the network monitoring / firewall utility
* Include the tiny sha1sum utility. Are there still people who use the deprecated md5sum?
* +1 for including the latest version of SDL in Puppy 5,it's a must have for those that are into gaming or emulation
* A mouse cursor with inverted colors (black outline with white fill,as in Ubuntu/Winblows)
* OpenGL support (including the glxinfo and glxgears utilities)
* Updated fonts
* Ability to uninstall/remove some of the built-in packages (PetBegone functionality integrated into the package manager)
* Installing or uninstalling packages in the package manager should be started by double-clicking the selected package (I like to select and view an item first before activating it,this is a major annoyance)
* and +1 for a more modern theme

Puppy 5.0 needs to focus more on overall usability and package quality

[technosaurus]

Possible base systems
i386 Debian i386
i486 Slackware, Knoppix i486
i586 Mandriva, PCLinuxOS, Suse i586
i686 Arch, Foresight i686

**T2 any architecture (Dingo is built with it)
*Simplux = Puppy + Gentoo

Using T2, Puppy can be automatically built for several architectures and Barry has kindly supplied his original scripts to build puppy from T2 on the ibiblio mirror. Highly customizable & 3100+ packages

Simplux - I haven't personally used it, but it sounds like a possible solution. Many architectures and ~20000 packages

Back to Slack - i486 architecture, 3.x compatibility, lots of packages, +Slax, Vector, Zenwalk, Wolvix, Nimblex....

Personally I prefer the T2 route since we could build 64 bit versions and easily create a 486sx version for the ebox and even a PPC, arm or any other port if we wanted. It is even supposed to support the minix, hurd and bsd kernels soon.

[panzerpuppy]

I'd vote for Slack compatibility,but with an i686 multimedia optimized kernel (T2).

Isn't the latest version of Slackware i686 optimized?

[Pizzasgood]

So if I follow the rules, give Barry credit for creating Puppy, make sure that my puplet is sufficiently differentiated from mainstream puppy then I am not discrtiminating against anyone if I use my choice of programs rather than theirs.

I wasn't asking about any legal concerns. I wanted clarification on the statement about discrimination.

The discrimination thing isn't choice of applications. It's about not even allowing certain people to use it. And I think it only applies to the license itself. So if you configured your server to block New-Yorkers, I don't think that it would violate that clause. But if you worded the license so that New-Yorkers were not technically allowed to use it, or had less rights than other people (i.e. no making derivative works), then you'd be in violation.

But making a product that favors people who like app A over people who like app B doesn't matter, as long as the license doesn't say something stupid like "Only people who like Firefox can use this product."

Does that help?


Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on tv.


EDIT: Corrected a mis-type that made me contradict myself.

[cb88]

this thread is stupid and pointless ttuuxxx lacks the ability to even compile ffmpeg even after i told him how to fix it (and yes it compiles just fine on T2 and even on slackware where i compiled it along time ago from svn)

he is not qualified and neither am I i don't have the time/resources to build puppy and probably couldn't do it if i did have time need i mention that i have compiled ffmpeg again and ttuuxxx hasn't

ttuuxxx doesn't have the ability but has the time and he is also arrogant as if he does have the ability to do it

if ttuuxxx wants to build puppy then fine i just hope it is never official and btw ubuntu is an unstable piece of bloat use debian if at all get a clue

I know this post is harsh but im fed up with all this silliness and with my statistics class too...

[KF6SNJ]

If ttuuxx wants to create a 5.0 fork, let him. I see no issue with parallel distributions of puppy. Perhaps it could be called Puppy - HotDog. I am starting to setup to look at and re-work ChurchPup. I am not qualified, but I am going to try. Who are we to say who is and isn't qualified? Linux itself developed from people trying something new, regardless of thier "qualifications". Isn't that part of how we are to where we are with our numerous derivatives? Personally, I think that there is plenty of room in the puppy community for this. I would also like to see a "SuperHacker" puppy that has compilers for every known programming language. That could be cool (though it may actually prove rather bloated).


Reason for Edit: Grammer Error.

[cb88]

sure ttuuxxx can do that thats just fine... flooding the forum with what amount to takover notices is not fine however

if ttuuxxx wants to "try something new" there is no one stopping him but I sure don't want him ordering me around or posting polls just to manipulate things into what the "people" want puppy isn't about that we have the load of calculators for a reason they are tiny and they all work pretty decent just cause another distro uses only galculator doesn't mean we should

ttuuxxx is saying things that only noobs on this forum ask... like why soo many calculators or why is it not based on ubuntu these have NEVER been questions asked seasoned puppy users as far as I know the answers soon become clear anything ive ever seen based on ubuntu was slow and the calculators are neat and small whats next add open office and KDE!? time to get back to our roots of smallness uniqueness and original inventiveness

supperhacker puppy ROFL... and would even have lolcode compiler uberbloat here we come!