Puppy 5.1 to 6
I just happened to be running Ttuuxxx's Tpup 001 tonight.Still have it installed on my test box and other than Abiword not wanting to play nicely it would be a pretty solid starting point.Other than the 2.3.31.5 kernel it's pretty much "regular" Puppy.01micko wrote:
Man, we commend the work you've done around here, plenty of it . Why don't you follow woof? You can of course as you know, build a Tpup, all native Puppy, weighing in at around 100MB. Without ridiculous Gnome dependencies. . I'm not too sure Barry is interested in his "Very Wary " effort, using the 2.6.30.5 kernel from 431 and Xorg 7.3.
Cheers
There are lots of interesting possibilities in the ever-expanding Puppy universe.
Um, I should re-phrase that. I meant that IMO Barry is doing very-wary as more of an afterthought for those with older gear. We all know his main focus is Quirky.I'm not too sure Barry is interested in his "Very Wary " effort, using the 2.6.30.5 kernel from 431 and Xorg 7.3.
There, that's better!
Cheers
Puppy Linux Blog - contact me for access
What definitely won't attract new developers is infighting within the community. It seems rather unlikely that we can get everybody together and all agree on a single vision for Puppy. And that's ok - having multiple puplets that implement different ideas is better than one compromise-puplet that doesn't do anything particularly well.01micko wrote: What we need is more developers... are we going to attract them without a bone?
What attracted me to Puppy is the open, collaborative, community where I get to do my own thing and follow my own ideas. If I had to implement other people's ideas, I'd quickly get bored and leave.
The idea that some puplets are "official" and some are not seems like it's going to cause problems. Perhaps there's a better way to denote puplet quality and level of support that's not guaranteed to alienate people.
- ttuuxxx
- Posts: 11171
- Joined: Sat 05 May 2007, 10:00
- Location: Ontario Canada,Sydney Australia
- Contact:
The Community editions went pretty good, only a couple of fights, but the end results were excellent.jemimah wrote:
What definitely won't attract new developers is infighting within the community. It seems rather unlikely that we can get everybody together and all agree on a single vision for Puppy.
All we need to do is have a rough outline what the release goals are, etc and start there, maybe even have Barry lend a hand if we get stuck along the way, I'm talking about 100% from scratch. To my knowledge Barry is the only one ever to do it that way, well of course we'll reuse the puppy scripts etc, but all the apps/libs etc should be compiled.
ttuuxxx
http://audio.online-convert.com/ <-- excellent site
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
http://samples.mplayerhq.hu/A-codecs/ <-- Codec Test Files
http://html5games.com/ <-- excellent HTML5 games :)
Yay pupians on IRC
Well, since there are now many ways to build puppy and Barry started naming projects differently as he did with Quirky maybe we should have official "puppy linux" versions to be "puppy puppy" builds meaning building puppy from own packages and have other upup/dpup/whatever builds as separate projects and not jumping from repo to repo on every different release. That way we're not making progress because of simple reason that is confirmed with 5.0 - different base causes different hardware support and different bugs.
And the reason we're doing it is we simply don't have enough packages in puppy's own repo and they don't get updated and recompiled to match newer kernels and software versions. I mean look - pidgin 2.4 is still in official repo that doesn't work for anyone most of the people joining IRC for support first ask about pidgin not working with their MSN accounts and ayttm crashing on MSN too
Well, since there are now many ways to build puppy and Barry started naming projects differently as he did with Quirky maybe we should have official "puppy linux" versions to be "puppy puppy" builds meaning building puppy from own packages and have other upup/dpup/whatever builds as separate projects and not jumping from repo to repo on every different release. That way we're not making progress because of simple reason that is confirmed with 5.0 - different base causes different hardware support and different bugs.
And the reason we're doing it is we simply don't have enough packages in puppy's own repo and they don't get updated and recompiled to match newer kernels and software versions. I mean look - pidgin 2.4 is still in official repo that doesn't work for anyone most of the people joining IRC for support first ask about pidgin not working with their MSN accounts and ayttm crashing on MSN too
puppy.b0x.me stuff mirrored [url=https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_Mb589v0iCXNnhSZWRwd3R2UWs]HERE[/url] or [url=http://archive.org/details/Puppy_Linux_puppy.b0x.me_mirror]HERE[/url]
-
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Tue 26 Jan 2010, 19:37
- Location: Florida
Agreed.jemimah wrote:What definitely won't attract new developers is infighting within the community.
Agreed again.It seems rather unlikely that we can get everybody together and all agree on a single vision for Puppy. And that's ok - having multiple puplets that implement different ideas is better than one compromise-puplet that doesn't do anything particularly well.
Nobody wants you to do either. There is a difference between organizing and making sure all of the needs of puppy users are met, than trying to force you to do what you don't want to do.What attracted me to Puppy is the open, collaborative, community where I get to do my own thing and follow my own ideas. If I had to implement other people's ideas, I'd quickly get bored and leave.
This is EXACTLY what is needed!The idea that some puplets are "official" and some are not seems like it's going to cause problems. Perhaps there's a better way to denote puplet quality and level of support that's not guaranteed to alienate people
*sighs* You still don't get it, do you.Lobster wrote:Ttuuxxx I am happy to report that the IRC (click on desktop chat)
is now capable of supporting meetings after its recent expulsion
of those suffering from voluntary tourette syndrome
The most you might find is a lost troll
or crazy cructacean . . .
Maybe something can be arranged in a few weeks time
Are concerned Puppy citizens welcome/allowed to this meeting? Or just selectively so? I for one am thrilled to see this, not that most of you care
I admit, part of the appeal of Puppy for me is the handcrafted, built from scratch concept, and woof is huge step away from that. My guess is though - that trying to do community edition skipping woof entirely could be extremely divisive. Maybe not.ttuuxxx wrote: The Community editions went pretty good, only a couple of fights, but the end results were excellent.
All we need to do is have a rough outline what the release goals are, etc and start there, maybe even have Barry lend a hand if we get stuck along the way, I'm talking about 100% from scratch. To my knowledge Barry is the only one ever to do it that way, well of course we'll reuse the puppy scripts etc, but all the apps/libs etc should be compiled.
ttuuxxx
Personally though, the project sounds fun to me, and I'd like to help.
I wonder if it would take too long though - if we can't generate good momentum soon enough or fast enough it's difficult to keep things moving.
I think most will agree that there is a need for teamwork
most of the troubles though are due to "trying to be the one to rule the planet and not just being yourself "
seeing strengths in other people is a good thing
while some people see it as threat
knowing where you shine and other people shine
create overlapping skills that complement each other
mostly the drive you have dictates what you have interest in
if you have interest in art work desktops icons themes and such thats your strong point
not saying that you can't do other things you will
only be happy doing what your good at though
that's just my thoughts on that not a rule
and this same idea goes for programmers ,techs,etc...
when you focus on what you are good at
good things follow
new friendships are made old friendships are healed
life continues happily on its way
Joe
most of the troubles though are due to "trying to be the one to rule the planet and not just being yourself "
seeing strengths in other people is a good thing
while some people see it as threat
knowing where you shine and other people shine
create overlapping skills that complement each other
mostly the drive you have dictates what you have interest in
if you have interest in art work desktops icons themes and such thats your strong point
not saying that you can't do other things you will
only be happy doing what your good at though
that's just my thoughts on that not a rule
and this same idea goes for programmers ,techs,etc...
when you focus on what you are good at
good things follow
new friendships are made old friendships are healed
life continues happily on its way
Joe
- Lobster
- Official Crustacean
- Posts: 15522
- Joined: Wed 04 May 2005, 06:06
- Location: Paradox Realm
- Contact:
Guys
there will be a meetings on Sunday on the open chat forum
http://puppylinux.org/wikka/meeting30May2010
Everyone is welcome,
though our primary interest is providing a meeting
for developer exchange.
If need be (Ttuuxxx has expressed an interest)
private chats just for developers can be arranged
though that can easily happen through pm, email,
Barrys blog, Jemimahs Puppee forum and so on
Suggested 'Reports from active Puppys'
can take the form of a brief intro
and Q & A
on for example
Puppy 5, 5.1, Slaxer_Pup, Quirky, Puplet creators
. . . depends who turns up
there will be a meetings on Sunday on the open chat forum
http://puppylinux.org/wikka/meeting30May2010
Everyone is welcome,
though our primary interest is providing a meeting
for developer exchange.
If need be (Ttuuxxx has expressed an interest)
private chats just for developers can be arranged
though that can easily happen through pm, email,
Barrys blog, Jemimahs Puppee forum and so on
Suggested 'Reports from active Puppys'
can take the form of a brief intro
and Q & A
on for example
Puppy 5, 5.1, Slaxer_Pup, Quirky, Puplet creators
. . . depends who turns up
Last edited by Lobster on Wed 26 May 2010, 05:16, edited 1 time in total.
Puppy 6 proposal
I hope to "attend" if I may.
I'd also like to expand and put my idea forward again that it's time the puppy system grew up and had two component stages.
Puppy 6 may be that time!
The first stage is the core, that part of puppy that should be a "bare-bones of bare-bones". Consisting of the system and basic utilities only, covered under the menu as filesystem, utility, and above, but not including any applications other than a tiny (basic non-invasive) browser. It should be java aware by default. All configuration components should be working towards being interfaced via the browser, then many help directions and messages can be available. I believe there is even a text type browser out there somewhere, that can be used for the pre-x stages.
The second stage consists of applications and packages of applications. The only requirement is that they must be inclusive. In other words, would have no component that is reliant on another package or set of packages. I would only put a restriction on this group of a requirement of having an individual .pet for each application in their .sts package set. This is so those that only want one application can have access to it.
I think you would find that many groups would willing to work to this matrix, as they wouldn't have to supply the core level part, only what is required to meet their version.
i'll add more later (washing for the line calls )
scsijon
I'd also like to expand and put my idea forward again that it's time the puppy system grew up and had two component stages.
Puppy 6 may be that time!
The first stage is the core, that part of puppy that should be a "bare-bones of bare-bones". Consisting of the system and basic utilities only, covered under the menu as filesystem, utility, and above, but not including any applications other than a tiny (basic non-invasive) browser. It should be java aware by default. All configuration components should be working towards being interfaced via the browser, then many help directions and messages can be available. I believe there is even a text type browser out there somewhere, that can be used for the pre-x stages.
The second stage consists of applications and packages of applications. The only requirement is that they must be inclusive. In other words, would have no component that is reliant on another package or set of packages. I would only put a restriction on this group of a requirement of having an individual .pet for each application in their .sts package set. This is so those that only want one application can have access to it.
I think you would find that many groups would willing to work to this matrix, as they wouldn't have to supply the core level part, only what is required to meet their version.
i'll add more later (washing for the line calls )
scsijon
Re: Puppy 6 proposal
Barry's woof is already the core. From there, the possibilities are endless.scsijon wrote:The first stage is the core, that part of puppy that should be a "bare-bones of bare-bones". Consisting of the system and basic utilities only, covered under the menu as filesystem, utility, and above, but not including any applications other than a tiny (basic non-invasive) browser. It should be java aware by default. All configuration components should be working towards being interfaced via the browser, then many help directions and messages can be available. I believe there is even a text type browser out there somewhere, that can be used for the pre-x stages.
-
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Tue 26 Jan 2010, 19:37
- Location: Florida
Re: Puppy 6 proposal
Ehhhm sounds like Arch Linuxscsijon wrote:I hope to "attend" if I may.
I'd also like to expand and put my idea forward again that it's time the puppy system grew up and had two component stages.
Puppy 6 may be that time!
The first stage is the core, that part of puppy that should be a "bare-bones of bare-bones". Consisting of the system and basic utilities only, covered under the menu as filesystem, utility, and above, but not including any applications other than a tiny (basic non-invasive) browser. It should be java aware by default. All configuration components should be working towards being interfaced via the browser, then many help directions and messages can be available. I believe there is even a text type browser out there somewhere, that can be used for the pre-x stages.
The second stage consists of applications and packages of applications. The only requirement is that they must be inclusive. In other words, would have no component that is reliant on another package or set of packages. I would only put a restriction on this group of a requirement of having an individual .pet for each application in their .sts package set. This is so those that only want one application can have access to it.
I think you would find that many groups would willing to work to this matrix, as they wouldn't have to supply the core level part, only what is required to meet their version.
i'll add more later (washing for the line calls )
scsijon
Re: Puppy 6 proposal
Or Choicepup or Slax. All have gone that core + applications choice route.shariebeth wrote:Ehhhm sounds like Arch Linux
I think Lucid Puppy is pretty much able to be built that way too. It's only a matter of the included options. Playdayz left the main browser out to give users a choice and there's no reason why Quickpet can't be expanded to give function to scsijon's idea.
The point is that there are already a number of options to explore, including one or two in the Puppy fold. No need to reinvent the wheel, eh?
[i]Actions speak louder than words ... and they usually work when words don't![/i]
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com
SIP:whodo@proxy01.sipphone.com; whodo@realsip.com
sharibeth,
I agree to a point.
Make a bare-bones Puppy, but then install all the applications from PET packages and from there, make the final ISO.
That way, the ISO/ Puppy would come with it's normal applications, but they could be uninstalled with Puppy Package manager and replaced with ones of ones choosing.
Of course some applications rely on others being there for dependencies. So it would be possible to break Puppy.
Mind you, it is just a thought.
I agree to a point.
Make a bare-bones Puppy, but then install all the applications from PET packages and from there, make the final ISO.
That way, the ISO/ Puppy would come with it's normal applications, but they could be uninstalled with Puppy Package manager and replaced with ones of ones choosing.
Of course some applications rely on others being there for dependencies. So it would be possible to break Puppy.
Mind you, it is just a thought.
-
- Posts: 242
- Joined: Tue 26 Jan 2010, 19:37
- Location: Florida
It seems to me that it is better to clean up what we already have and make sure somebody is around to support it and fix it consistently and reliably than keep adding new versions to the mix that are half baked.
At least at this point. Right now there is chaos, devs disappear for any number of reasons, and users are having to hop from puppy to puppy trying to find one that works. Not the best scenario.
Better to have a few well working, well labeled, well documented, and well supported Puppies (that the public is getting immediate access to) than 50 problems that nobody is around or able to support or fix.
And THAT is what should be discussed and settled at the meetings Sunday.
Note: as raffy said early, the "givens" in this post are pretty much the same. This is not directed at the creative devs doing their thing.
At least at this point. Right now there is chaos, devs disappear for any number of reasons, and users are having to hop from puppy to puppy trying to find one that works. Not the best scenario.
Better to have a few well working, well labeled, well documented, and well supported Puppies (that the public is getting immediate access to) than 50 problems that nobody is around or able to support or fix.
And THAT is what should be discussed and settled at the meetings Sunday.
Note: as raffy said early, the "givens" in this post are pretty much the same. This is not directed at the creative devs doing their thing.
- Béèm
- Posts: 11763
- Joined: Wed 22 Nov 2006, 00:47
- Location: Brussels IBM Thinkpad R40, 256MB, 20GB, WiFi ipw2100. Frugal Lin'N'Win
And in fact all is there already, but scattered.Lobster wrote:# Extremely friendly for Linux newbies.
# Will just work, no hassles.
These two are about usability
and I feel Micks (01micko) efforts with Quickpet
in Lucid illustrate this well
I can see this developing well into 5.1
and hopefully beyond
Both my sisters are forced into using Puppy
but find it awkward and geeky.
They would rather be using Windows.
How can we make it more usable
for our demanding potential end users?
- the 440CE with it's control center
- the stardust, now DuDe, development
- Lucid has an interesting development with the quickpet.
- dpup 486 b4 was going into a good direction.
- dejans555's kdpup (based on dpup 486 b4). Yes it's huge, but it has it all. Pupy app's and KDE ones. Also, for me, the best implementation to configure and maintain the system as you want in a user-friendly way. I think Windows users will feel very comfortable with it.
I didn't test all puppies/derivatives, so there may be other ones.
Also I want to repeat what has been said already before by people. Make first the existing ones perfect. Get rid of all the bugs. This isn't case yet. I see the same bugs reported over and over again when a new release is out. And then only start with a new one.
Also I fear incompatibility between debian, ubuntu, etc.. applications. Not all users realize that an app compiled in one has problems/doesn't run in other environments.
Time savers:
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
Find packages in a snap and install using Puppy Package Manager (Menu).
[url=http://puppylinux.org/wikka/HomePage]Consult Wikka[/url]
Use peppyy's [url=http://wellminded.com/puppy/pupsearch.html]puppysearch[/url]
If a dev takes the time to make it completely stable, the most vocal users complain that the software is out of date, the libraries are old, progress isn't being made fast enough, and declare the puplet is "rotten to the core," and falling on Distrowatch. It doesn't run on the latest hardware, or have the latest whiz-bang features, and we're just plain bored with it - let's move on to the bleeding edge.
The devs lose either way, but ultimately stability comes from as much from the dedication and quality of the beta testers as the developers.
It's a lot to ask of any individual developer to know about all the bug fixes, and new features that come out in the entire puppy community. Developing a puplet, and staying current with events in the forums, and knowing what the other developers are up to is a full time job - and most of us already have a full time job. Testers can help a lot just by helping the devs stay informed of progress and bug fixes on other puplets.
Devs are just users will skills. We build the puplets that we want to create, add the features we're interested in, and support them until it's just too much of a drain on personal resources, or it gets too boring to go on. Asking more than that is counter productive.
If we can get a few people together that want to work on the same project, manage to avoid toxic personality conflicts, and agree on a single vision, it's possible to make progress faster and work more effectively. But that's a big if.
The devs lose either way, but ultimately stability comes from as much from the dedication and quality of the beta testers as the developers.
It's a lot to ask of any individual developer to know about all the bug fixes, and new features that come out in the entire puppy community. Developing a puplet, and staying current with events in the forums, and knowing what the other developers are up to is a full time job - and most of us already have a full time job. Testers can help a lot just by helping the devs stay informed of progress and bug fixes on other puplets.
Devs are just users will skills. We build the puplets that we want to create, add the features we're interested in, and support them until it's just too much of a drain on personal resources, or it gets too boring to go on. Asking more than that is counter productive.
If we can get a few people together that want to work on the same project, manage to avoid toxic personality conflicts, and agree on a single vision, it's possible to make progress faster and work more effectively. But that's a big if.