Pre Release Testing Methodologies for Puppy Linux

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

#16 Post by Lobster »

Good news from Jeremy, Raffy and Warren
GIt is coming . . .
http://git.puppylinux.ca/
http://www.puppylinux.org/wiki/development/git

Chaos is what makes Puppy fun. :D
Everyones help is needed with Git.

Developers want and sometimes only have time to code.
So what happens is they upload it to the forum - "here new code"

We can not force, insist, red tape programmers into some 'rule of git'
So how to facilitate?

My thoughts are along the line of 'puppy pack'
voluntary puppys who can take uploaded code and add it to the git depository
as soon as they see it appearing

Is this feasible?
because getting all developers to use git
- ain't gonna happen . . . :?

I am going to learn git
I am going to have my own cutting edge local git repository
I might not code much but even so . . .

Any other ideas to retain the simplicity?
Puppy Raspup 8.2Final 8)
Puppy Links Page http://www.smokey01.com/bruceb/puppy.html :D

User avatar
ecomoney
Posts: 2178
Joined: Fri 25 Nov 2005, 07:00
Location: Lincolnshire, England
Contact:

#17 Post by ecomoney »

Hmmm...it sounds as if GIT is some kind of way of handling the boring bits of keeping track of all the bugs/testing/etc. Ive had a quick read but Im pressed for time to get the cybercafe online at the end of the week.

Definetely interesting though Lobster thanks
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]

Sorry, my server is down atm!

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

#18 Post by ttuuxxx »

Guy the way I look at it, We started 4.2 as a 'fix/update release' and what we ended up with was almost a new distro, we replaced so much in such little time it was crazy, well for me it was, I was working day and night either compiling or trying to fix things, building graphics, etc endless work, The only things I would liked seen different is time, for a project of that magnitude it would of been better to have maybe double that time. Then for sure things would of been more evident and less bugs. But it was our first time out as a group and it was a learning phase. Maybe next time we could have a forum section, not subsection, but section that stands out and call it the 'Sand Box' like Barry does, there we could have sub subcategories like software, bugs etc under software we could have a section like the packagers names where they can list the software for people to look at and test. I know what your going to say, what about Git,
well the average user won't even go near Git, so that will take the bulk of testers aways. Git is good in someways and other its not.
How many of you have used Git in the past say like 12 months ago and more? I have but I bet most haven't.
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
ecomoney
Posts: 2178
Joined: Fri 25 Nov 2005, 07:00
Location: Lincolnshire, England
Contact:

#19 Post by ecomoney »

Good idea about the forum section Ttuxxx, Single linear "thread" for bugs and fixes can mean things get missed. A "Thread per bug" approach would make more sense, then we could put "[SQIUSHED]" or something in the title when its solved and put into the latest version, like in the "howtos".

After bugs are "squished" they would naturally descend to the bottom of the forum section, leaving a forum page of outstanding issues there when testers clicked on "sandbox" (I think we should use a more newb-friendly less jargon term but thats me). This could be a link combined with the "default alpha/beta" seamonkey homepage.

Your right there were a lot of updates to 4.2, from 4.1.2. Was it necessary to attempt do so much in one go? I missed the first part of the development process where these needs were identified so I dont know. Basically the only things that should have been updated were the things that were really needed by our users (i.e. flash, Seamonkey, themes/look and feel). Personally Im sorry that the messenger was removed, but glad transmission was put back in etc etc. At least we have meebo.

Ttuxxx, you did a LOT of work towards 4.2 (I am grateful) and its completely understandable that things got missed considering our lack of collective project management experience and the workload you had. Im glad your able to look back and reflect, and contribute to how we might be even better in the future. Thanks for posting your thoughts.
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]

Sorry, my server is down atm!

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#20 Post by WhoDo »

ecomoney wrote:The problem with the "nike - just do it" approach is that is someone "just doesnt do it" then faults get missed i.e. Abiword. Im not sure what background you have is software development, but testing is an important part, and should always be done methodically...not just "hope for the best". If this type of work isnt to your taste, then pass it this way.
BarryK wrote:Puppy has never been run as a "proper" project, it has always been ad-hoc. There is no CVS/SVN server, no bug-reporter. For the last couple of years, new puppies have been released every 6 - 8 weeks, a hectic pace, and some would say too hasty for proper bug catching prior to each release. Right up front I would like to state that none of this is likely to change.
Patriot wrote:I know my active time here is only a few days old but again I reiterate, one of the reason I was attracted to puppy is because its a bit more relaxing here. Too much red tape hinders creativity and I've banged my head against it many times in the real world. It will be great to have some QA/QC methods but don't let it spoil the fun please ...
BarryK wrote:There is the appearance of chaos in many aspects of the project, but there is intelligence behind my choice to let everything run free. Developers come in and just let their heads go -- maximum creativity. I think that the end result speaks for itself.
ecomoney wrote:Puppy 4.2 is a vast improvement on previous puppies with just a few rough edges...you should take responsibility for it all.
BarryK wrote:For me, Puppy is a fun project. If it stops being fun, I will move onto something else. I don't have the motivation for more formality, and I find that trying to please many people is not good for the project in the long run. So I just do whatever I please -- I consider all advice very carefully, and often do follow it, but in the end what it comes down to is I decide what to do next in Puppy. There is no committee, no inner-circle. You may advise me, but I have no obligation to do anything that you say or expect. If you think I've done something dumb, well, that's just tough.
ecomoney wrote:Not wishing to curb your enthusiasm for moving on to even bigger and better things, puppy has always had .1 and .2 releases. Currently on our main puppylinux.org download page, users are being served with a distro with a "semi-broken" wordprocessor, as well as a few other faults. Shouldnt this be put right as soon as possible before even more new features are introduced?
BarryK wrote:Anybody is welcome to fork the project and manage it anyway they like. The thing is though, it isn't easy, an incredible amount of commitment is required. If you like Puppy but would like to see more formal management, ... {fill in your own blanks on this one but mine would be "Nike"}
When I took control of the Puppy 4.2 development effort, one of my key concerns was to keep the Puppy ethos. Several examples of the philosophy that engendered that ethos are quoted above in response to various quotes from this thread. I have given my own reasoned arguments, on more than one occasion, as to why I will NOT be pushed into quickly releasing a dotpoint1 update. I won't reiterate those here. Rob, the answers to your questions have been posted many times. Repeating the questions multiple times, using mulitiple methods with multiple presumed justifications for doing so will NOT change the answers. :roll:
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

User avatar
ecomoney
Posts: 2178
Joined: Fri 25 Nov 2005, 07:00
Location: Lincolnshire, England
Contact:

#21 Post by ecomoney »

Whodo, weve posted at the same time yet again? I was editing the top post to summerize positive things that people have suggested in the discussion.

Have a read of them, and tell me how doing them would spoil any of the developers fun? How would they change their ethos? It obviously works and I wouldnt want to "endanger" that.

Obviously testing isnt a fun process, but theres no lack of people willing to do it, Im not trying to force you to do it. Im just saying let others contribute here too.
I consider all advice very carefully, and often do follow it
BarryK
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]

Sorry, my server is down atm!

User avatar
Dougal
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed 19 Oct 2005, 13:06
Location: Hell more grotesque than any medieval woodcut

#22 Post by Dougal »

WhoDo wrote:
Dougal wrote:This isn't the first release where some menu items ended up just plainly not working..
Which ones, Dougal? In building each release that was one of the things I tried to do - click on each menu item, especially if it was an upgraded or new package, to see that it actually worked.
Well, I recall a few times in the past that we had such problems, where either really basic problems persisted all the way to the last beta, or the final was released with such "dead" menu items. It appears like it still happens...
What's the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose
Some say your toes
But I think it's your mind

User avatar
Dougal
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed 19 Oct 2005, 13:06
Location: Hell more grotesque than any medieval woodcut

#23 Post by Dougal »

ttuuxxx wrote:Guy the way I look at it, We started 4.2 as a 'fix/update release' and what we ended up with was almost a new distro,
And that is exactly the problem (and why I don't participate in 4.2 etc.): you have no idea what you're talking about. Updating a bunch of gui apps is not what creating a new distro consists of -- that's what puplets are.
What Puppy was in a very bad need of is a new base (what Barry is doing now with T2), as the current filesystem is about 18 months old, or at least a new kernel -- so when we try and help people solve their wireless problems we wouldn't have to tell them "go try Ultrapup, it has a newer kernel". Tempestuous' time would have been much better spent just compiling a new kernel, rather than trying to backport various modules to 2.6.25.

As I mentioned on Barry's blog when he "retired": what is needed is for various people to take responsibility for various parts of Puppy -- the load needs to be spread.
No-one needs to try and do everything -- each person should concentrate on a part that interests them and try and do that as good as possible. The "coordinator" should be the one looking over everything -- and only at the level of telling the relevant persons "Oi, matey! What you got for me today?" and making sure they don't stuff things up.

All this "progress" and muggins still hasn't got the keys to the official repos!
What's the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose
Some say your toes
But I think it's your mind

User avatar
ecomoney
Posts: 2178
Joined: Fri 25 Nov 2005, 07:00
Location: Lincolnshire, England
Contact:

#24 Post by ecomoney »

I know I didnt see you or a few of the usual contributors around for 4.2 development. Ttuxxx can test my patience too, and im known for it.

The repos still dont contain openoffice, amsn or a recent firefox, most needed by linux newbs, although the packages exist :(

Why all this possessiveness?
Puppy Linux's [url=http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=296352#296352]Mission[/url]

Sorry, my server is down atm!

User avatar
MU
Posts: 13649
Joined: Wed 24 Aug 2005, 16:52
Location: Karlsruhe, Germany
Contact:

#25 Post by MU »

4.2 is great work, it allowed the comunity to add many addons or enhancements to the 4.12 base.
It has a conceptual and artistic focus (make Puppy more appealing, look nicer, offer beautifull addons like pwidgets).

A next step - Puppy 4.3 - might be focussing the "technical core" again.

- New Kernel ( UTF-8 )
- updated Glib/Gtk
- Xorg 7.4
- test/enhance the localization, e.g. add languagepacks (german.sfs, french.sfs ...)

- Avoid adding new programs / look / gimmicks

If you concentrate on these 4 points, it should take not too much time to release it.
A final step also might update some of the applications to the newest versions.

The challenging point might be, to offer these "technical" upgrades optionally.
Version 1:
- Keep Kernel 2.6.25.16 and Xorg 7.3 in one version - e.g. to be able to use the old Nvidia 73.x drivers.
Version 2:
- Use Kernel 2.6.29.x and Xorg 7.4 to be able to use e.g. newest Intel graficschips
Version 3:
- also keep a Kernel 2.6.21.7 version, as we meanwhile have so many additional kernelmodules compiled by Dougal and Tempestous, so that even exotic old hardware still works.

Once this fundament is updated, a version 4.4 might look again in adding/replacing software.
E.G. the new glib/gtk would allow, to use the Val(a)ide as important tool for software development. You can use it already now, but it may be unstable, so currently it is the better choice to use Ultrapup to develop vala/genie programs.

Mark
[url=http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?p=173456#173456]my recommended links[/url]

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#26 Post by WhoDo »

Dougal wrote:
WhoDo wrote:
Dougal wrote:This isn't the first release where some menu items ended up just plainly not working..
Which ones, Dougal?
Well, I recall a few times in the past that we had such problems, where either really basic problems persisted all the way to the last beta, or the final was released with such "dead" menu items. It appears like it still happens...
Yes, that problem only surfaces in specific conditions so I wouldn't have noticed it in pre-testing just by clicking on the menu entry, as was the case for so many others who tested it in RC4. A longer testing cycle for RemaX would have helped, though, so that's my bad.
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#27 Post by WhoDo »

Dougal wrote:And that is exactly the problem (and why I don't participate in 4.2 etc.): you have no idea what you're talking about.
Despite occasional appearances to the contrary, ttuuxxx wasn't running the 4.2 project; I was.
Dougal wrote:What Puppy was in a very bad need of is a new base (what Barry is doing now with T2), as the current filesystem is about 18 months old, or at least a new kernel -- so when we try and help people solve their wireless problems we wouldn't have to tell them "go try Ultrapup, it has a newer kernel". Tempestuous' time would have been much better spent just compiling a new kernel, rather than trying to backport various modules to 2.6.25.

As I mentioned on Barry's blog when he "retired": what is needed is for various people to take responsibility for various parts of Puppy -- the load needs to be spread.
Agreed. My understanding was, from the various threads that were discussing the early development of 4.2, that you would be leading the core development part of the community effort for the 4.2 release. I coordinated the inclusion of whatever I was given, including making decisions about what was in or out. With very little input in the way of material changes to the core, except for some important changes to the init script, there was nothing for me to "coordinate" from that part of the program. Now I think I understand why.
Dougal wrote:The "coordinator" should be the one looking over everything -- and only at the level of telling the relevant persons "Oi, matey! What you got for me today?" and making sure they don't stuff things up.

All this "progress" and muggins still hasn't got the keys to the official repos!
Yep, that's me alright ... except for being solely responsible for any stuff ups. I tried to ensure that personal projects didn't overlap, certainly, but sometimes changes in one place do break things elsewhere, as happened once or twice with localisations of key scripts. That's where the alpha, beta and rc testers come in, so I don't have to do everything from the packaging outward.

I'm pleased to note that you have recognised the focus of 4.2 was NOT to produce "a whole new distro", and your clear recognition that what we produced was indeed only a "polish", packages and usability update from 4.1.2, as I foreshadowed way back when the project started. That's why I wasn't too worried when guys like you and tempestuous didn't take a whole lot of interest in the Deep Thought project. That's also why I have been careful to bracket the next release as 4.2.1/4.3 in my postings about what will follow Deep Thought.

If there is no serious effort in the underlying core, we will have a 4.2.1 release at the appropriate time - bug fixes folded in, packages updated or rolled back as necessary, etc. No changes to look-and-feel at all. If there is some serious effort to update the core, including a new T2 build from Barry, then 4.3 will be the eventual product and that will require a significantly longer testing cycle, more involvement from core devs like you and tempestuous, and less emphasis on packages and polish. Either way, the packages will be coming from the Git repository and managed through that facility.

Why do you think muggins needs the "keys to the official repos"? If he needs something included there, that can be coordinated through me for the next release. I don't see the problem.
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#28 Post by WhoDo »

ecomoney wrote:The repos still dont contain openoffice, amsn or a recent firefox, most needed by linux newbs, although the packages exist :(

Why all this possessiveness?
The official repos do contain ayttm (not amsn) and a working firefox rather than one that remains buggy (as the 3 series), but they will NEVER contain a 250Mb office package in sfs format. That's just not what they're for. The official repos are for the packages likely to be included in Puppy by default and Open Office just doesn't fit the bill; nor does K-Office which I happen to like better and which is much smaller. In a sub-100Mb distribution it is unlikely that huge application suites will ever be found at ibiblio.org but that doesn't mean there aren't ways to make them available through the PETget package manager.

It isn't "possessiveness" either; :roll: it's "protection" of the community asset for the benefit of all. That will not change with Git, either. There will likely be only ONE person with the rights to commit changes to the packages in the main tree.
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

User avatar
WhoDo
Posts: 4428
Joined: Wed 12 Jul 2006, 01:58
Location: Lake Macquarie NSW Australia

#29 Post by WhoDo »

MU wrote:4.2 is great work, it allowed the comunity to add many addons or enhancements to the 4.12 base.
It has a conceptual and artistic focus (make Puppy more appealing, look nicer, offer beautifull addons like pwidgets).
Exactly! And don't forget it was also intended to be easier to use for refugees as well. There were quite a number of relatively small usability "tweaks" to that end.
MU wrote:A next step - Puppy 4.3 - might be focussing the "technical core" again.

- New Kernel ( UTF-8 )
- updated Glib/Gtk
- Xorg 7.4
- test/enhance the localization, e.g. add languagepacks (german.sfs, french.sfs ...)

- Avoid adding new programs / look / gimmicks

If you concentrate on these 4 points, it should take not too much time to release it.
Absolutely agree! And by concentrating in these key areas we can also test the operation of Git, and establish our "best practice" rules for its effective use at the same time, without the complication of lots of different development efforts across many packages.
MU wrote:A final step also might update some of the applications to the newest versions.
Agreed, with the emphasis on "some" of the applications. Those that are working optimally can be left alone for that release, with only those that are working but not to the best level being updated with later releases, and then only when we have the core exactly where we want it.
MU wrote:The challenging point might be, to offer these "technical" upgrades optionally.
Version 1:
- Keep Kernel 2.6.25.16 and Xorg 7.3 in one version - e.g. to be able to use the old Nvidia 73.x drivers.
Version 2:
- Use Kernel 2.6.29.x and Xorg 7.4 to be able to use e.g. newest Intel graficschips
Version 3:
- also keep a Kernel 2.6.21.7 version, as we meanwhile have so many additional kernelmodules compiled by Dougal and Tempestous, so that even exotic old hardware still works.
Here is where I would prefer to decomplicate our releases a bit if possible. I have been clear elsewhere that I've no in depth understanding of the kernel building process, including what is possible and what isn't with each version. Having said that, I'd really like to roll all the legacy stuff into a single kernel version. Whether that's k2.6.21.7 or k2.6.25.16 doesn't matter to me from the point of consolidation. We must continue to support legacy hardware, for the sake of our user base, so the "best" of these two kernels at supporting that user community ought to be the base and enhancements from the other rolled into that one wherever possible.

Then we can use the later, "cutting edge" 2.6.29.x kernel for high end and later edition hardware, including enabling SMP support and perhaps Quad Core as well (if that is possible - I said I didn't really know about compiling kernels :wink: )

Either way, supporting any more than 2 x kernels for standard releases is just too difficult for any community based edition IMHO.
MU wrote:Once this fundament is updated, a version 4.4 might look again in adding/replacing software.
E.G. the new glib/gtk would allow, to use the Val(a)ide as important tool for software development. You can use it already now, but it may be unstable, so currently it is the better choice to use Ultrapup to develop vala/genie programs.
I would also hope that by then Woof will be the packaging system of choice, and our devs will then be free to develop for a debian, slackware or purely puppy base using whatever environment is supported by their chosen platform. They would also be using Git to have those developed applications looking like polished, shiny apples sitting on the Git tree just waiting to be "plucked" by those eager packagers building puplets as well as the community for standard releases. If that happens as I suspect, then we will probably be looking at series 5.x Puppy from that point forward.
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com

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

#30 Post by ttuuxxx »

Just from what I've read WhoDo Quad Core won't be part of that all in one kernel you want, due to the fact that it can cause a loop and sslow down dual core cpu's by a great deal, but quad core cpu's can use dual core OS with added speed over a single core. So basicallt dual core should be the peak kernel. But a better Idea would be having a all in one smp, version and a 64bit kernel, then if Barry was kean enough he could make a woof release where it downloads 64bit packages from say ubuntu because they offer it. It would be a extremely quick way of having a 64bit puppy version.
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
Dougal
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed 19 Oct 2005, 13:06
Location: Hell more grotesque than any medieval woodcut

#31 Post by Dougal »

ecomoney wrote:The repos still dont contain openoffice, amsn or a recent firefox, most needed by linux newbs, although the packages exist Sad

Why all this possessiveness?
I don't know, but I can tell you that had I read ttuuxx's reply to Zigbert's Pshutdown post before making my last reply, I would have been much less civil towards him. Zigbert is one of the few worthy people on this forum -- something I can't say about ttuuxx.
What's the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose
Some say your toes
But I think it's your mind

User avatar
Dougal
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed 19 Oct 2005, 13:06
Location: Hell more grotesque than any medieval woodcut

#32 Post by Dougal »

MU wrote:4.2 is great work, it allowed the comunity to add many addons or enhancements to the 4.12 base.
It has a conceptual and artistic focus (make Puppy more appealing, look nicer, offer beautifull addons like pwidgets).

A next step - Puppy 4.3 - might be focussing the "technical core" again.

- New Kernel ( UTF-8 )
- updated Glib/Gtk
- Xorg 7.4
- test/enhance the localization, e.g. add languagepacks (german.sfs, french.sfs ...)

- Avoid adding new programs / look / gimmicks

If you concentrate on these 4 points, it should take not too much time to release it.
A final step also might update some of the applications to the newest versions.
I completely disagree.
You need to upgrade glib/gtk, xorg and the kernel (and possible gcc first), then you need to recompile everything that depends on them, i.e. the entire filesystem.
That means that all the compiling ttuuxx was so proud of will have to be repeated after you got a new filesystem.
So all this is just a waste of time, as it doesn't solve the basic problems of getting Puppy to work. Making it look good and slick might be nice, but it is of no use when people can't use it at all (and there are plenty of examples on the forum of posts by people who had some problem and got no attention at all, since people were probably too busy playing with adding eyecandy (and add new bugs) to bother with trying to fix the existing problems. (and I won't even raise the question of whether some of those eyecandy items are "in the Puppy spirit" -- maybe some things where a certain way for a reason?)

(And should I ask why, if you think 4.2 is so good, were you (as one of the only "developers" around here) busy contributing instead to wow's "unnamed puplet"? Ahem)

A couple of technical points:
- utf8 has nothing to do with a new kernel: it's just a matter of inserting fs/nls/nls_utf8.ko during init, like the other two nls modules, then mounting partitions as utf8.
- sfs files should not be relied on for every little thing people want to add -- that's what dotpets are for. People who think it's smart to load 20 sfs files should try and actually use such a system on a memory constrained machine for a length of time and see how well it works. Then maybe read a bit about squashfs. (Also, using a dotpet you don't have to reboot. Just 'cause people are used to such silly behaviour from Windows doesn't make it right.)
What's the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose
Some say your toes
But I think it's your mind

User avatar
Dougal
Posts: 2502
Joined: Wed 19 Oct 2005, 13:06
Location: Hell more grotesque than any medieval woodcut

#33 Post by Dougal »

WhoDo wrote:My understanding was, from the various threads that were discussing the early development of 4.2, that you would be leading the core development part of the community effort for the 4.2 release. I coordinated the inclusion of whatever I was given, including making decisions about what was in or out. With very little input in the way of material changes to the core, except for some important changes to the init script, there was nothing for me to "coordinate" from that part of the program.
Barry and some of the old-timers wanted me to do it and I refused, partly due to technical limitations, but mostly because (as I stated on Barry's blog) there's nothing to coordinate.
Who are the "maintainers" you work with? The only maintainers around here I can think about are me (unofficially maintaining rarsa'a network-wizard, just because I'm the one who bothered to try and fix and improve it) and people like Sigmund and Jason Pline (plinej) (and gyro etc.), who went ahead and wrote P* apps and by default are their maintainers (and disciple, with things like the trash appdir). And there's tempestuous, obviously, the Puppy janitor, cleaning up after others and trying to get things working for users.
So, as far as I'm concerned, 4.20 is basically a WhoDo/ttuuxx puplet.
I'm pleased to note that you have recognised the focus of 4.2 was NOT to produce "a whole new distro", and your clear recognition that what we produced was indeed only a "polish", packages and usability update from 4.1.2, as I foreshadowed way back when the project started. That's why I wasn't too worried when guys like you and tempestuous didn't take a whole lot of interest in the Deep Thought project.
If there is some serious effort to update the core, including a new T2 build from Barry, then 4.3 will be the eventual product and that will require a significantly longer testing cycle, more involvement from core devs like you and tempestuous, and less emphasis on packages and polish.
This shows what the basic problem: when Barry announced his retirement*, you folks went ahead and planned a new release, instead of starting from the ground and getting together a group of people who can actually build a distro (as I put it back then: first be able to replicate the existing Puppy, before you go and try to enhance it).
So where are you now? You're planning on Barry to get the new build done for you -- but he's supposed to be gone!
I'm not attacking you or anything, I'm just pointing out the reality, as it seems like Lobster has spiked some people's drinks around here...
Why do you think muggins needs the "keys to the official repos"? If he needs something included there, that can be coordinated through me for the next release. I don't see the problem.
Anyone who's been on this forum for a while should have noticed by now that muggins has been posting dotpups/dotpets to the forum on a daily basis for the past few years (even now that he's in Tazzie -- is that a vacation, or was W'gong too warm for him??) -- and that's not the way to go. Someone like him should be given the power to create "official" packages (following some guidelines about how they should be made) and upload them to the repository, then update packages.txt before every release (and no, he shouldn't have to get permission from you for every package, as he is in a better position that you to decide if the package is ok or not! He's the one who saw the sources and compiled them). As it is now, he is a "wated resource".

And please will everybody stop talking about Git? Git is an SCM. The "S" stands for source. What should be in git is directories with the various Puppy scripts and sources for Puppy-specific apps. Not compiled binaries or tarballs -- there is no point in that. And it certainly won't change the way things work around here -- people moving their arses will.

*- I don't really consider Barry as being retired from Puppy: the only way to keep him away from Puppy is to keep him away from computers... so all he did was escape the responsibility of "having" to care about problems people are having -- since Puppy is his toy, not something he created to add any more stress to his life (hey, I'd say moving to Middle Of Nowhere, WA is probably a matter of trying to escape responsibilities...).
What's the ugliest part of your body?
Some say your nose
Some say your toes
But I think it's your mind

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

#34 Post by ttuuxxx »

Dougal wrote:
ecomoney wrote:
Why all this possessiveness?
I don't know, but I can tell you that had I read ttuuxx's reply to Zigbert's Pshutdown post before making my last reply, I would have been much less civil towards him. Zigbert is one of the few worthy people on this forum -- something I can't say about ttuuxx.
Hey why do you brig that crap into here, Zigbert started it 4.2 beta and continued it again 2 days ago, Dougal really if your going to get involved, Go jump off a bridge first,
Then get out of the water, shake your head and get the water out of your ears, Get toweled off. Feel refreshed?? good:) Now listen closely.

I've really had enough crap with Zigbert and his crap apllications and shit sirring attitude. This will end up bad if you continue raising it. Do you not think I can't read, or do you not think I won't respond, what are you thinking by making that statement in this thread? It was bad enough in the other threads, let it go!!!!.
ttuuxxx
Last edited by ttuuxxx on Thu 09 Apr 2009, 01:59, edited 1 time in total.
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)

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

#35 Post by ttuuxxx »

Dougal wrote:
MU wrote: That means that all the compiling ttuuxx was so proud of will have to be repeated after you got a new filesystem.
So all this is just a waste of time,
I would do it all again in a heartbeat if WhoDo asked, really you have a condescending tone about you. I don't think Barry ever changed glib,gtk in a series model. That would be stupid and confusing for anybody downloading official packages from 4 series at the repo.
Thats what series 5.0 will be, 4.2 was to show we could continue on and we did, and to call that a puplet your really pushing things. Go take a break, and lose your rude, ungrateful attitude.
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)

Post Reply