Collaborating as a team or group for Puppy good

News, happenings
Message
Author
jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#31 Post by jpeps »

I'd be willing to volunteer as treasurer.

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

Re: All of what we say can be structured...simply into a framewo

#32 Post by mavrothal »

gcmartin wrote: Are we at a maturity-level of PLDF to step-out in investing in such an effort?

gcmartin,
This is not how it works.
Is not for you, me and the "treasurer" (kudos :lol: ) to tell/advise TaZoC, 01Micko, JamesBond etc what and how.
Nobody is going to build our pupplet!

Try this instead (with this order).
1) Build what you can.
2) Tell (concept) what you want to build, show (code) how you go about it and where you are at (prototype).
3) Ask for help where you can not do it yourself (for whatever reason)
4) Ask for alternative technical suggestions/improvements/impementations
5) Invite (usually privately) people that contribute to join
6) If things start moving to the direction you want and can not be accommodated by the current structures, try to make it an "organization" (ie website, wiki, bug-tracker, IRC channel, mailing list and eventually forum).

PS: make sure you have a lot of time and some disposable income.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#33 Post by jpeps »

I vote for mavrothal's proposal.

gcmartin

#34 Post by gcmartin »

Don't take this wrongly, but, I think that approach is not a very good one. And because I say this doesn't mean that your comments are not of value. They are...

I see what you are suggesting, but, this is what is already done in Puppyland and there are many examples of this.

What you offer is similar to what has been going on.

I am suggesting true collaboration. This starts with a definition. One way of looking at a definition is to look at a starting point of what the developers I suggest already have done, understand, and are clear on. As a team we dont "tell" them what to do...instead we work with them working from a documented design point and working in such a way where everyone contributes what they can to the whole.

Its not just a slapping of packs together or just using a particular repo. Its about looking at what is to be achieved, the audience intended, and using the creativity of the forum, collaborating (at least willing to) for addressing objective.

I'm not trying to talk over someone's heads, here. And, I am not trying to suggest that because one does/doesn't write code he shouldn't be discussing a collaboration project either.

We talking about finding a methodology to work together and giving an honest try at finding approaches for useful work which could become generally available and have enough meat on the bones that everyone can "ride the dog". Much of the prior efforts were done using old approaches and old methodologies. With the open-sources tools and free collaboration tools, this community can achieve working as a team for common useful good.

It will take a willingness to want to work together.

P.S. How did anyone get the idea that "I" (as in eye) suggesting telling a project leader what to do? Is this a funny that I am missing or was someone trying to make a genuine comment?

AND, thanks @Jpeps for your offer of Treasurer and your opening monetary contribution to go toward a paid site. But, I think that as an Open source project team, we MAY be able to get collaboration site areas for free, if, of course, we carry this forward.

User avatar
mavrothal
Posts: 3096
Joined: Mon 24 Aug 2009, 18:23

#35 Post by mavrothal »

gcmartin wrote:What you offer is similar to what has been going on.
What I'm offering is what has been going on in the entire linux/open source universe.
And there are many reasons for that but no time to explain. Google it if interested.

Some forum-hopping will show that this does not discourage people from trying. Hopefully this is the case here too.
== [url=http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html]Here is how to solve your[/url] [url=https://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html]Linux problems fast[/url] ==

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#36 Post by jpeps »

gcmartin wrote:Don't take this wrongly, but, I think that approach is not a very good one.
It's good enough to be surpassing multi billion dollar, professionally organized, collaborative efforts by the best and brightest.

ICPUG
Posts: 1308
Joined: Mon 25 Jul 2005, 00:09
Location: UK

#37 Post by ICPUG »

rcrsn51 wrote:
ICPUG wrote:You will not get a coordinated anything if a developer is in charge. They don't have the right people skills.
This idea has been expressed before in the forum and I have never understood it. It paints the picture of "developers" as being social misfits still living in their parents' basements. There are several active Puppy projects where the team leaders strike me as having excellent people skills.
Sigh - That is not what I meant at all. I am not denigrating developers. we must have great developers but we also must have users; testers; qa; etc. and then we need the guy to coordinate everything.

I don't have people skills either but I don't regard myself as a social misfit and I don't get upset about it - although I do get upset with those who think people without people skills have no value to offer.

Jpeps is right. We have some great developers around here but we have very few, if any, with the skills to provide the 'Project manager', for want of a better term, to create that really great Puppy Linux Distro.

User avatar
rcrsn51
Posts: 13096
Joined: Tue 05 Sep 2006, 13:50
Location: Stratford, Ontario

#38 Post by rcrsn51 »

ICPUG wrote:I am not denigrating developers
but we have very few, if any, with the skills to provide the 'Project manager', for want of a better term, to create that really great Puppy Linux Distro.
Again, I don't understand this. How can you take a group of strangers, assign them the arbitrary title of "developer" and then claim to know what skill set they do or do not have?

Please define "developer". Is it anyone who knows how to type "make"? Or knows some gtkdialog? How does knowing those things disqualify you from being able to work with other people?

User avatar
greengeek
Posts: 5789
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010, 09:34
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

#39 Post by greengeek »

gcmartin wrote:AND, thanks @Jpeps for your offer of Treasurer and your opening monetary contribution to go toward a paid site.
It was me that offered the money (although I do recognise that $NZ aren't worth as much as $Aus :-) )
jpeps was offering to MANAGE the money. That's collaboration in action :-)
But if people are happy with freeware, that's cool.

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#40 Post by jpeps »

greengeek wrote:It was me that offered the money (although I do recognise that $NZ aren't worth as much as $Aus :-) )
jpeps was offering to MANAGE the money. That's collaboration in action :-)
But if people are happy with freeware, that's cool.
greengeek: You can send me both your money AND your code, and rest assured that it will be managed properly. :)

User avatar
greengeek
Posts: 5789
Joined: Tue 20 Jul 2010, 09:34
Location: Republic of Novo Zelande

#41 Post by greengeek »

jpeps wrote: You can send me both your money AND your code, and rest assured that it will be managed properly. :)
My first wife said the same thing...
:-)

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#42 Post by jpeps »

greengeek wrote: My first wife said the same thing...
:-)
Collaboration doesn't always work out the way it should. How about the great collaborator, Apple Computer? Seems like their entire management is getting shifted around due to disputes over things what the graphics should look like. Ultimately, the person with the most power boots everyone out that doesn't do his bidding.

elroy

#43 Post by elroy »

I could be taking this wrong, but when it comes to discussions of money I'm inclined to be put off right away (outside of the nominal amounts needed to secure web space, etc.). I'm all for an open-source model. If I were into this for profit, I'd concentrate on the biggest user base possible (at present MS or Android - at present and looking down the road). But for me, anyway, that isn't the case. For me this is a labor of love. I like the idea of an open source model, and feel very strongly that there is a need for this kind of development, and therefore I am "all in" in terms of it. And due to the efforts of such peoples as BK and others that make this possible in the Puppy Linux format, I, personally, have no choice other than to follow their example. In my opinion, this is one area that puppy excels. It may be fragmented, but it is certainly open. For those that wish to read and learn, the information is available to them. It may not be presented in a 'cookie-cutter' format, but none-the-less, it's there for the taking. And to me, to be fair (and, of course, this is my personal opinion), if you're taking, you should also be giving if at all possible.

elroy

#44 Post by elroy »

rcrsn51 wrote:Again, I don't understand this. How can you take a group of strangers, assign them the arbitrary title of "developer" and then claim to know what skill set they do or do not have?

Please define "developer". Is it anyone who knows how to type "make"? Or knows some gtkdialog? How does knowing those things disqualify you from being able to work with other people?
I'd have to agree with rcrsn51 on this point. And that said, just because someone is a "developer" it should not necessarily disqualify them from being a "project manager". Something of that magnitude should be taken on a case by case scenario, something that stands on its' own merits, not as something that stands on a blanket theory. Some developers may be terrible in that role; some may be better in that role. I think that the skill-set needed is attention to detail, of course people skills, and of most importance - vision. With all of that, even if said person has all of those traits, they'd need another - the intestinal fortitude to know what they're doing is for the common good regardless of the few hundred complaints they receive, and the tact to be able to fend off the rebuttal in a manner that is inoffensive to most. To preclude a developer of this skill-set isn't necessarily realistic.

jpeps
Posts: 3179
Joined: Sat 31 May 2008, 19:00

#45 Post by jpeps »

elroy wrote: And to me, to be fair (and, of course, this is my personal opinion), if you're taking, you should also be giving if at all possible.
Fortunately, you can do that very easily at Puppy Linux, without having to first ask permission from a group of "authorities" with their own personal agendas. If there's something that can be improved, you'll get feedback to that effect from users. That makes it a win-win situation.

elroy

#46 Post by elroy »

jpeps wrote:
elroy wrote: And to me, to be fair (and, of course, this is my personal opinion), if you're taking, you should also be giving if at all possible.
Fortunately, you can do that very easily at Puppy Linux, without having to first ask permission from a group of "authorities" with their own personal agendas. If there's something that can be improved, you'll get feedback to that effect from users. That makes it a win-win situation.
Yes, and that's the beauty of the murga forums. You may get thrashed if so deserving, but you're more than likely to get positive, useful feedback. I've used the Arch forums, and while certainly very useful, I must say that in comparison, the puppy murga forum is more friendly for the newbie. It's because of this that, as a forum, murga is of utmost value to myself. But I must be honest, the Arch wiki is without peer at present. I applaud those that are taking the effort to make the puppy wiki as usable as possible, but to begrudge the Arch wiki would be unrealistic. It is very thorough, and at present has no peer.

User avatar
Monsie
Posts: 631
Joined: Thu 01 Dec 2011, 07:37
Location: Kamloops BC Canada

Collaborating as a team or group for Puppy good

#47 Post by Monsie »

Here is an article that looks at some of the hosts for open source projects: http://opensource.com/life/12/11/code-h ... comparison Considering that the article was published three days ago, it seems rather timely with respect to this thread.

While thinking about hosts for Puppy based projects, it occurs to me that many people want to have a place to call our own, rather than meet up at SourceForge, Google Code, or some other well known public website. That being the case, consider the merits of using Raffy's site... Why not transform it to be the meeting place for Puppy enthusiasts to collaborate on specific projects.... projects that originate from the discussions that evolve here at the Forum?

More food for thought,
Monsie
My [u]username[/u] is pronounced: "mun-see". Derived from my surname, it was my nickname throughout high school.

disciple
Posts: 6984
Joined: Sun 21 May 2006, 01:46
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

#48 Post by disciple »

While still young compared to SourceForge, GitHub has become the de facto host for open source projects, with over 4.2 million repositories at the time of writing. GitHub's strength is their tagline, 'Social Coding'. On GitHub, it's trivial to make a copy of another developer's project, make changes to that project, and then submit those changes using GitHub's pull request system.
This thing about being the "de facto host" sounds suspicious to me. I wonder if that 4.2 million includes every clone of every repository...
Do you know a good gtkdialog program? Please post a link here

Classic Puppy quotes

ROOT FOREVER
GTK2 FOREVER

disciple
Posts: 6984
Joined: Sun 21 May 2006, 01:46
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Re: Collaboration in Puppyland has great benefit

#49 Post by disciple »

And since we're almost back on the subject:
greengeek wrote:In the interests of longterm stability I think it is important to look for a collaborative platform that does not fall prey to what we have seen over the last couple of years.

Lots of valuable Puppy info got lost when the FBI took down MegaUpload. Google and others are coming under greater pressure to "spy and control". Lot's of people have found their valuable data locked up and unable to be accessed.

Free offerings, including Google (microsoft's mortal enemy) are a natural target for corporate and governmental interference. I just think thought should be given to a paid service that is less likely to fall prey to these risks.
1. I struggle a little with the comparison between MegaUpload and something like Google Code or Sourceforge.
Sites like MegaUpload were always widely regarding (including by their users) as being primarily a tool for copyright infringement: leasing a ship to the "pirates". But I don't see people accusing sourceforge and google code of being tools for copyright or patent infringement. They are a lot more "respectable".
2. I guess I'm taking both sides of an argument here, but from what I could see the heavy users of MegaUpload were typically paying users, so I don't think you can say it was an easy target because it was a free service. Was it even a particularly easy target? It didn't even have a shortage of money to defend itself, but having money doesn't help. The US government thinks it is God and that the law doesn't apply to it, so it can just steal everyone's files...
Do you know a good gtkdialog program? Please post a link here

Classic Puppy quotes

ROOT FOREVER
GTK2 FOREVER

gcmartin

#50 Post by gcmartin »

Thanks to all as we move the emotion out of the discussion and focus on Collaboration methods. This is evidenced by comments over the last couple days.

Firstly, can a collaboration model exist where members "equally" sit at a working/conference table to contribute as much as they can for a common effort? Does this require a Project leader or can the working table be the "project leader" with all table members working toward goal?

Next, if this can be thought of as a good experiment, which tool (site) can be utilized so that we can track each's contribution as the project morphs to product landing in the PLDF (our forum). Would this experiment of table members contributing freely in both definition and goal be workable?

Be reminded, that as with any radical approach, there is periods of newness without any past evidence to go on. But, open source and the internet and now tools that are freely available can allow a change in how things are done that were not possible in past models of doing stuff.

I think all here are peering at its possibilities ... albeit from differing vantages....but still peering. Step back a little and relook at what you are all saying and I think you can begin to see a new path where teaming can become 2nd nature.

Here to help
Edit: P.S. I am not directing at anyone with my first sentence. It is merely a general statement, not aimed anywhere!!!

Post Reply