Comments reactivated
It is not very practical to have comments disabled on this blog, there is too much going on.What has happened is I have been getting heaps of emails, and replying to them is a lot of work, and many of them are of interest to others and really belong on this blog or the forum.
I'll think about implementing some kind of moderation later.
Comments - Edit - Delete
Comments
I have received a lot of emails about the disabling of comments on this blog.A few people have said that it is nice to read the blog without the "noise". Others have said that it is better if other developers can post immediate responses, rather than the very roundabout way of emailing me. Not just developers, often a user will have some useful item to report and it is convenient to be able to do it directly.
I am thinking of reinstating comments, but moderated.
As this is my personal blog, it is quite reasonable for me to only allow comments that I like. So, any that I don't, I should immediately delete, and even ban certain people.
However, there should be a page that explains what comments are acceptable. Basically anything that is positive, constructive. Anything that is targeting aggravating me, gets banned. Those who harp on in a negative vein, or dredge up old negativities that have already been put to bed, get banned.
This PPLOG blog is a very simple Perl script, a single file. It does have banning by IP address, but I have to edit the script and re-upload it, which is cumbersome. Also, I don't think there is any mechanism to associate a particular poster with their IP address. If I could somehow have a little display of usernames with their IP addresses, and an interactive way of banning by IP address, I will feel ok about reinstating comments.
Any Perl wiz reading this? -- and interested in beefing up PPLOG with extra functionality? Our PPLOG PET package is here:
http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/puppylinux/pet_packages-woof/pplog-1.1.2-2.pet
Comments - Edit - Delete
Read-only blog
I would like to give advance notice.The comments by ICPUG and Jota here:
http://bkhome.org/blog/?viewDetailed=01459
...are just the most recent of on-going aggravation that I have to put up with.
A couple of years ago, I stated that in 2010 I will receive my pension and then I will wind down my involvement in the Puppy project. Well, I do now have my pension, and the wind-down will happen.
I'm retired, I don't want aggravation. One of the reasons that I started Quirky was to get away from the aggro.
I may put up a contender for Puppy 5.0, after that, Quirky will be my main thing. I will also work on Woof, but in a heavily moderated environment -- I might start a small moderated forum or maybe just a bugzilla for Woof.
I will probably create reference builds from Woof every now and then. Quirky will be one of those.
I probably won't be interacting on the main Puppy forum much.
This blog will become read-only in a couple of months.
An observation. Us developers put in considerable effort gratis, out of generosity of heart. Perhaps some might do it for fame, but my motivation is just to give something to the community, and I have a long-time desire to end the Microsoft monopoly.
There is a kind of mean-spiritedness in posts of many users, people who just take, who don't really appreciate what is done for them for free. Is this the "welfare mentality"?
Interesting, it is the aggro that actually has driven me to be more isolationist. So the critics will actually see their criticisms come true.
Actually, I can do whatever I like. I am the guy who owns the Puppy Linux name. If I decide one day to create a Puppy 6.0, I can do it. I'm in a pessimistic mood right now -- perhaps the idea of the community taking over, or even "community editions", was a bad idea. Perhaps I should remain in charge, bringing out a new Puppy occasionally.
After all, if one or more people are all that keen on creating their own Puppy, they can fork Puppy and do it.
Comments - Edit - Delete
Thanks
Thanks for all the responses to my concern about the lack of an official Puppy release for sometime -- 5 months and 10 days.I notice that we have slipped down the ranks at Distrowatch.
I understand the problems that the coordinators of 4.4 and proposed 5.0 puppies have -- the real-life demands. But, we do have an urgent need to get a new release "out there", a reference build.
Give me a couple more days, I think that I have a proposal for the next official Puppy, something interesting.
Comments - Edit - Delete
Official 4.3.2?
Puppy 4.3.1 was released on October 17, 2009. That's five months since an official release! Too long.The development of 4.4 has gone into hibernation, and we don't really know when that will pick up again.
Meanwhile, I keep rolling along developing Woof and adding so many goodies (like the improper shutdown handling just announced). Users of 431 are left on the sidelines watching this but not participating unless they try one of the recent builds such as Dpup, Tpup, or Quirky. There are also some specialised builds such as Jemimah's Puppeee.
Then there's the fact that newcomers will quite naturally choose to download the latest official Puppy, 4.3.1, but in reality they are getting something that we have moved way beyond.
So, I know that I am supposed to be retired from the frontline of releasing official puppies, but considering all of the above, should I come back in and bring out 4.3.2?
I did build an experimental 4.3.2 recently, which was reasonably sane. So, I could do another one then start a forum thread so we can thrash out the bugs, then it will become a gap-filler official release -- something to fill the void until 4.4 or even 5.0 comes along.
I would need to have considerable positive response to do this. I don't want to move back in stepping on toes. So if you don't want me to do it and would rather position some other build as the contender for next official release, please say so -- though note that I am talking about something that we can release soon, given that huge 5 month interval.
Comments - Edit - Delete
Why do I bother?
I sometimes wonder why I bother. In my position, I deal with criticism on a daily basis. Some of it comes direct to me in emails and pm's.Then there is negativity by some who lurk on the #puppylinux IRC channel.
Then there are those who post to the forum with superficial, mis-informed, nit-picking, and just plain wrong comments, like in this thread:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=48160
I really don't need the aggravation. The latest contribution on the forum has prompted me to think some more about my retirement.
My original plan was to retire from Puppy development early in 2010. I want to keep working on Woof and do some Genie coding, and that will likely continue into 2010, 2011.
The multi-user improvement -- yes that is a definite contender for incorporation into Woof. That's a short-term goal, I might do that soon.
Puppy 4.4 and 5.0 are now being developed by the community. That's good. I'll probably give the access to the ibiblio.org site to one or two community members soon.
I won't be bringing out another official Puppy release, so I am now retired in that regard.
What I might do is release a new distro sometime, which is something that I have mentioned before. It will be 100% personal, no irc, no forum, just my thing. In fact, I'm already working on it.
It is not intended to be a general purpose distro.
Comments - Edit - Delete
WhoDo has resigned
WhoDo (Warren) let me know yesterday that he is resigning from the Package Coordinator job. I expressed my regrets. It is now public knowledge on the forum:http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=43469&start=15
I am disappointed that the squabbling has continued. Hmmm, this is democracy at work ...the "benevolent dictator" model looks better every day.
Regarding flame wars on the forum, well, it happens. I have been known to lose my cool at times, but I recognise it immediately and pull back. What I see in some threads is one person posts something slightly provocative, there is a counter post, then a counter post to that, and it spirals out of control. Perhaps there is a case for the forum moderators to step in and say "time out", "cool off", and freeze the thread or whatever. I don't recommend banning people unless it is a last resort.
Regarding who should run the show next year when I go more into the background (I'll be working on Puppy-related projects no doubt!), I am starting to think we should stay with the dictator model but with someone who has a history of never or rarely losing their cool on the forum -- there are 5-6 possibilities, but I don't know if any of them would be interested. If that looks like a good way to go, there would have to be a safety feature builtin, such as me having power of veto.
I did think about the idea of staying in charge, but slowing down the pace of development to a trickle, maybe one new release per year. I don't think that is practical though, as too many people are clamouring for bug fixes, new features, drivers, code contributions, etc., etc.
...anyone got any thoughts about these ruminations of mine?
Comments - Edit - Delete
Planning for Puppy 5.0
I have received several emails and pms requesting me to exert some authority over the future coordination and planning of Puppy, as they see things as falling-apart somewhat.Yes, there are problems. Quite degenerate discussions have been going on in the forum. Even this very recent thread still has simmering discontent:
http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=41668
Another major problem is that the Woof-built Puppy has major new infrastructure, and I'm the only one who really understands it all for now.
I would like to open the topic for discussion, whether I should step in for awhile, "take the reins" as they say -- or in this case, the leash. Temporarily only.
Lobster suggested awhile back that perhaps I should coordinate the very first Puppy 5.0. After that, a "council" or whatever can work on later versions of the 5.x series. That first 5.0 could be seen as a "template" or "reference build", and others would be welcome to add bells and whistles.
Now, to develop Puppy 5.0, there has to be a focus of effort on building from one of the compatible-distros. I have chosen Ubuntu Jaunty.
There are aguments in favour of Debian, Ubuntu, Arch, Slackware or T2, but a decision had to be made. But of course, people are free to work on Woof-builds based on any of the compatible-distros. I am personally interested in going for a super-cut-down T2 build a bit later on.
I suggest that someone have a coordination roll in my proposed Puppy 5.0 project, vetting PET packages for inclusion in the 'pet_packages-5' directory and SFSs into 'sfs_modules-5' directory on ibiblio.org. I have offered this position to WhoDo and he has accepted.
...a howto for this will be posted. Packages added to this repository will then be listed in the Puppy Package Manager.
Nathan has commented (in the thread linked-to above) that my retirement is rather strange as I seem to be working on Puppy harder than ever. Yes indeed. I have been beavering away working on Woof and the Puppy Package Manager, but moving back into coordinating 5.0 is not the direction I want to move in. So, take it as temporary only. Very temporary, probably only 5.0, then the invariable 5.0.1 bugfix.
In fact, as I have said years ago, by early 2010 I will get my superannuation (pension) and plan a major change in what I am doing. I will probably keep tinkering with Puppy stuff (and continue to maintain puppylinux.com), but may go off on other tangents, like explore Genie coding in depth ...or whatever. By then, preferably well before then, it would be great if a really solid team could be in place for running the Puppy show.
I don't consider myself to be a very good team player, which is one reason why I don't want to step back to full-on coordination longer-term. I also have specific ideas about Puppy and tend to do what I want, not what others keep telling me I should do. For example, I do not think that we should be moving back to including Tcl/Tk and it will definitely not be in my 5.0 release.
Of course, I am open to suggestion. If there is a consensus that my above comments are not appropriate in some way, let me know. If you agree with my comments, let me know also.
Comments - Edit - Delete
The proposed 4.2 team
I am very uncomfortable that I am forced into the role of assessing people for roles in the future 4.2 team.I have posted some thoughts in the previous blog post, and Lobster has reflected some of this in the wiki:
http://www.puppylinux.org/wiki/archives/old-wikka-wikki/categorycommunity/puppy-42-deep-thought
However, I am not the one to decide who leads the team, as I am supposed to have stepped back from any leadership role. So, I have made some preliminary recommendations only.
The list of interested parties can firm up over the next week, perhaps even those concerned can have some private dialog and come to a consensus. Then a forum thread can be started to seek a consensus from the wider Puppy community.
Regarding building a Slackware-based 4.3, or anything else for that matter, it is the kind of thing that someone can "just do". Perhaps check that two people aren't going to do the same thing first though. If someone just presented it completed, done, built from 4.1, then it immediately becomes a prime contender for the basis of 4.3. It would have to be a Unleashed build system, with packages rebuilt from Slackware packages, not a remaster. The 'devx' component also!
The way ahead for Puppy is for individuals (or very small group) to "take the bull by the horns", get stuck in and do something. Then present the result.
Comments - Edit - Delete
Partial report on what I have read
This is going to be one of my aggravated posts, that I am sometimes prone to.I have read part-way through the discussion on post-4.1, and a few things are emerging. Firstly, regarding tuuxx -- I do not want to target anyone, but ttuuxx has repeatedly posted comments that are incredibly superficial. For example:
"The 3 series just worked for myself better than any 4 series, I dislike the new pmount and shoving the floppy as default on my pc, which I haven't used the floppy since I made this pc around 12 months back, an extra click about 50 times a day, or the crappy clipboard downgrade on the 4.0 series that drives package producers like myself nuts. Really to tell you the the truth the only good thing on series 4 over 3 is is the default jwm theme. But I instally replace that anyways with Icewm."
Firstly, the Pmount in 4.1 can readily be configured without tabs, just hit the 'preferences' button. Secondly, the clipboard sync program used in earlier puppies was removed for good reason, but it is a PET package and can easily be installed -- without it, the clipboard works as per all other Linuxes/Unixes and just needs to be understood. If there is a majory wish, then it could be put back as default in 4.2.
All of the above has been explained to ttuuxx before, but he remains stuck with the same mantra. The assessment based on these comments that Puppy3 is better, is so incredibly superficial.
Then there is the issue that Puppy 2 or 3 works on some hardware whereas 4 doesn't. Yeah, well, it works both ways. This is basically a kernel version issue, not a Puppy version issue. There are so many posts that Puppy 4.x works properly for the first time, compared with versions prior to 4.x. Many recent posts about how fast 4.1 is also. 4.1 also has by far the best hardware detection.
Then there is the much-praised Slackware compatibility of 3.x. Well, someone can rebuild 4.1 with the latest Slackware packages if they want. It is a straightforward process, just very time consuming. 3.x is based on Slackware 12 packages, so is getting a bit long in the tooth. If someone wants to rebuild Unleashed 4.1 with the latest Slackware packages, then call it 5.0, why not? Go for it.
ttuuxx has asked can he coordinate the next Puppy3? Why not? I'm not stopping you, go for it.
There is also the comment from ttuuxx that I am maintaining control over everything, while at the same time retiring:
"Last I read Barry wants to keep just about everything puppy related in his name other than releasing newer versions"
Huh? I want to keep the "Puppy Linux" name, so what? To whom should I give it? The domain names puppylinux.org and puppylinux.com are registered by me, which means that I do have some veto power. Again, so what? Isn't this a valid safeguard?
So ttuuxx, I've had a go at you. Take it on the chin. You have also posted heaps of great stuff, and great packages. It's just that I am being bombarded with people asking me to make some kind of comments about what seems to be a lot of dissension on the forum ...well, I am now responding, and stepping on one or two toes in the process. Ttuuxx, it may turn out that you are the best guy to coordinate 4.2.
I have only read partway through the links, and so far I'm not impressed. Some people are asking for guidance, but what is to stop a small group getting together and work on 4.2? Nothing. Lobster is trying to coordinate something, but I am seeing a lot of arguing only from the contributors.
Meanwhile, the developers are continuing to work quietly. Regarding who should coordinate, by that I mean be in charge of using Unleashed to actually build it, and work on the core scripts, there are very few people to choose from. Other people can certainly play managerial and testing roles, but to actually build future Puppies...
Personally I think Dougal is the best choice, but he is working on 2.x. Probably Dougal would not want to take on such a heavy duty anyway. Who else is there that understands what is going on under-the-hood? Kirk? Rerwin is pretty good at coding and is learning about Puppy's boot scripts. MU also, but he has Muppy. Nathan also, but he has Grafpup, and also seems to have gone again. There are some other guys, like tempestuous, zigbert and HairyWill who have the technical ability, but again they would have to get up to speed with the boot scripts etc.
A side comment: many of the guys are "nice guys", approachable, friendly, helpful. Zigbert for example. One reason I favour Dougal is because he has a certain toughness and is less likely to bow to everyone's wishes. That's just my personal assessment.
There is some infrastructure in place for building Puppy, at Sourceforge, and I would like to thank cb88 for that. The thread started by cb88 had some good practical discussion.
4.2 is not going to be revolutionary, just refinements of 4.1. Fix some rough edges, update some packages, new themes. This can be done, just like 2.15CE was done. It just needs someone competent to step forward and do it. For 2.15CE, WhoDo offered to do it and we accepted, and he did a very good job. WhoDo, are you interested in a new project?....
I think the way forward needs to be along the lines of a Community Edition, like 2.15CE, which will get a group working together and build confidence, and will also help to clarify what should happen after 4.2. Other inftrastructure things like subversion control hosting, T2-rebuild or move to Slackware compatibility, and any formal foundation are not so urgent (and can continue to be developed/planned in the background). Also, the coordinator for 4.2 does not need to be a programmer, but should have good technical ability and be competent with using Unleashed -- my preference for someone who is a programmer and understands all of puppy's internals (like Dougal) and who also can take on a managerial role is the ideal though, for the longer term.
Comments - Edit - Delete