The future of the forum and about the structure

[fredx181]

*** The future of the forum and about the structure ***

Well, personally I have not much to say, for example if "Truly off-topic conversations" got removed (which is talked about much), I wouldn't lie awake from it.
It's a pity though that the forum isn't much visited, only a handful members online everyday and little feedback on the projects.
Still I think it has it's purpose, so for me it's fine how it is.
But perhaps the question should be if it's valuable enough for @rockedge to keep managing it, e.g. update the forum, security issues, pay for it etc...

@wiak has expressed many concerns about the direction of the forum, e.g. too much orientated on "Puppy".

So, what do you all think ?

[rockedge]

It will be an interesting subject on how we can possibly re-structure the forum to be more inclusive.of alternative systems.

We have to face it that there is in principle not much being done, if anything, to improve for example NoblePup at the woof-CE level and not just offer remasters of what is being built now.

Remember that the original forum structure was basically copied from the Murga forum at the beginning.

I agree with @wiak that the most important Puppy Linux developments are not happening anymore as much and a shift in priorities is needed to energize the developments.

[Jamayka24]

I think a subtitle should be ' and the future of Puppy Linux'
Why not concentrate on getting one flagship version running
really well and looking good ? I have been here on BookwormPup64 longer
than on any other Linux distro but it gives trouble and is not good looking.
My daughter saw my desktop and said 'it looks homemade'
I would like to be a part of making Puppy a choice for the many people
who dont want to go to Win 11 in 9 months time.
Respect to all you people who are working towards this.

[wizard]

@rockedge

I agree with @wiak that the most important Puppy Linux developments are not happening anymore as much and a shift in priorities is needed to energize the developments.

Not sure I fully understand that in terms of who and where it would be initiated.

Seems to me that the Devs working here on the forum do a great job of pushing the ball forward. Also think we sometimes under estimate our audience and presence. Take for instance, even my few remasters have been downloaded more than 2000 times. @peebee distros have been downloaded my thousands of times. Then total in ALL of the other choices a user has and it's a much bigger number. Keep in mind this is a lot more significant than just clicks on Distowatch.

Do think there are things we can do to make using the forum easier and less intimidating. For new users and visitors, a "Less is More" guided approach might work well.

Last, we have several members who have the skills to create Youtube videos. We might enlist them to do videos on more of the distro developments or topics covering the virtues of Puppy and our other related distros.

wizard

[greengeek]

I get the feeling that @wiak does not have a lot of affection for Puppy Linux and is deeply annoyed by metaphysical discussions on the PLDF.
As "second in command" it must be profoundly irritating for him to watch moderation with which he disagrees.

Is it possible to have two clear divisions on the forum?
eg:
1) PLDF
2) non-PLDF

The two different sub-fora could be moderated slightly differently in the sense of the non-PLDF section having no "off topic" section.

@wiak do you see any sense in that proposal?

[geo_c]

My daughter saw my desktop and said 'it looks homemade'
I would like to be a part of making Puppy a choice for the many people
who dont want to go to Win 11 in 9 months time.

Having used puppy for a very long time and now using mostly Kennel Linux, I have to wonder if the JWM desktop's resource advantages really warrant keeping it as the Puppy standard desktop.

I use Bookworm and F96 but also KLV-Boxer, which is Kennel Linux with a JWM desktop. But none of them are daily drivers at this point.

KLV-Boxer turned out to be an eye opener as to just how difficuilt it is to configure JWM without all the extensive Puppy tools that must represent years of dev time making it user friendly. But is it worth it anymore to do that, with desktops like Xfce being relatively lightweight and still looking fairly modern?. And further, with wayland being the future graphical server, even Xfce is somewhat behind the curve.

And of course that raises the question of the Puppy-Linux build system and other factors that have contributed to my daily use of Kennel Linux where many of the difficult upgrade and update hurdles of a conventional puppy are alleviated.

Ultimately, the immensely versatile and portable nature of all the approaches found on this forum are worthy of more traffic, and the real obstacles are dev focus and marketing, by which I mean internet presence, that is getting web listings and cross-site traffic, all of which I know little about.

Being one who has adopted Kennel Linux Void so heavily, my biased opinion is that these sorts of distros would be a far more inviting first experience of the what this community offers, in terms of looks, but more importantly in terms of package management and application compatibility.

But that's my opinion, and it's not necessarily true. If by some miraculous stroke of teamwork the Forum members came to an agreement on which distro to use as an entry point, how could the forum be restructured to steer newcomers to it?

[d-pupp]

I agree with @geo_c about moving away from some of the old software like jwm and rox. They work really well unfortunately they are dated.

The point I really agree with about package management. Having a system that is totally compatible with one of the main distro's and can use their package management system makes puppy much easier to use. People just like easy and unfortunately I have seem many just move on the first time something didn't work.

[dancytron]

I agree with @geo_c about moving away from some of the old software like jwm and rox. They work really well unfortunately they are dated.

The point I really agree with about package management. Having a system that is totally compatible with one of the main distro's and can use their package management system makes puppy much easier to use. People just like easy and unfortunately I have seem many just move on the first time something didn't work.

I also agree about the package management.

Rox and to a lesser extent jwm are a big part of what makes Puppy what it is. Rox is an acquired taste, but I think that's okay.

At least to me, an obsolete package manager that doesn't quite work right isn't worth keeping. A version of Bookworm Puppy that looked and acted the same but was able to just use apt/synaptic for package management and unpin all the packages would be an ideal Puppy to me. Then a "quickpet" for portables, app images and .sfs files.

I'm not sure how you'd do that without converting all the .pet files into .deb files.

[mikewalsh]

@geo_c :-

You make some good points.

Putting on my neutral, "sensible" hat for a moment - and laying my personal "Puppy fan" hat to one side - I have to agree. Whilst @dancytron is right about the JWM/ROX-filer combo being kind of what's become the Puppy 'trademark', it's not to everyone's liking; JWM/ROX is something of an acquired taste.

Although not a full-time KL user, I had quite an extended spell using 'Airedale' a couple of years back. It also reminded me of how much fun I had with some of @rg66 's XFCE-based "X-Puppies" several years ago, along with stark reminders that this kind of setup (with Thunar) is far closer - in real-world terms - to what most existing Linux users will be used to. And XFCE/Thunar is very 'noob-friendly'.

Whilst I've tried, for the past few years, to make the majority of my software packages as 'noob-friendly' & easy-to-use as I can - including the use of GUIs wherever possible - they're still built to work on top of a setup that is not the easiest in the world to get to grips with, especially for beginners. And I concur with what's been said by others in this thread so far; the 'non-Puppy' distros here - of which there are a commendable number nowadays, showcasing the inventiveness of the many fertile minds we have in our wee community - are NOT really getting as much exposure as they deserve.

Restructuring things so that everyone gets equal exposure, and everything is equally easy for beginners to find can only be to the benefit of all.

==============================

I wish I knew where @wiak got the idea that I'm antagonistic toward him. Nothing could be further from the truth.....and despite the fact that I tend to be somewhat reserved in my allocation of praise generally, I've always had a lot of respect for the guy. As I have for anybody who has the patience and dedication to modify/alter/change the fundamental nuts'n'bolts of any of our portable distros covered on the forum. My own feeble offerings do but "ride on the shoulders of giants", as the saying goes.....

I have nowt but admiration for all these Puppians who selflessly go out of their way to try & "improve the breed" generally.

=============================

The only reason I tend to concur with a lot of what @rockedge posts about is simple; in many areas, we think alike. That's all there is to it.

Mike.

[Clarity]

I have been associated with the compute industry for 6 decades starting as a programmer when my title was anything but.

I have seen the likes of many comings and goings in the industry before and after the "personal" use devices came into being.

Puppy and PLDF was excellent in what it afforded a community of people. This began in the days when some/many people had 486 (16 & 32 bit) PCs. The hardware has advanced and much knowledge has been gained and advanced in this forum.

The developers, and developer community is excellent for what they do.

Today, contrary to the frustrations that some advance members share, we are lodged (maybe launched) in a new technological world that is evolving so fast that its practically impossible for most peoples of the world to keep up with. And, as I began to notice this trend over a dozen years ago, the decline here and elsewhere in Linux continues even though the world has more people with technology at their fingertips.

Further, the quality of the products that the forum produces are so good, today, that I FEEL many may view and use forum's offerings, with little forum interactions.

ASking myself as I look in the mirror, what would I be looking at, today, if I was 40 years younger? Well it would certainly be very different because the humans of the world are trending differently than what was available 40 years ago.

The frustrations shown by current members are rightfully questioning "what, where, and how" to refocus the directions of the pathing in the forum with its products to attract a larger community of participating users.

The short answer:

1. Use AI in forum distro product announcements AND find methods of displaying forum distros on DistroWatch or MajorGeeks or Sourceforge or GIT or ??? to widen the area where new/existing users will discover them.

2. Use the products that raises curiosity in a viewer to come here to follow-up and beyond. Today, 2025 for example, I would not look at any distro that does NOT have Pipewire and Wayland, OOTB. Further, for me, KDE is so far ahead of EVERY other desktop that I am now considering it for my own system for production going forward...as nothing else is fully featured to compare with their combined integrated leadership. I really dont see anyone matching what KDE has produced thus far in 2025.

3. Lastly, WE have to stop pointing to distro size as some sort of an advantage in today's world, as that advantage continues to rapidly dimension as distro size is NOT distro advantage anymore.

The above is met by movement among several current forum distros which are geared for the new reality that modern linux gives all of us.

In essence, we'll need to adjust the focus of our membership glasses to not just stay relevant, but to become a beauty in concept to the vast world of today's peoples.

Not sure if this is a view that is welcomed, but, its my view.

[Clarity]

P.S. The forum currently (by @Sofiya) has a couple of KDE products that, I FEEL, if published on distrowatch and other sources, would drive instant traffic to this PLDF.

This not a larger step to drive a massive about-face in forum traffic, but its a start as this KDE product has the Linux user community buzzing.

This PLDF packaging is smaller in download size than the likes of Neon/Arch/Ubuntu/Fedora/etc WHILE functionality and performance is spectacular in this forum's offering by comparison to other non-forum distros.

[ozsouth]

Everything's changing - a lot in a short period. I'm struggling to keep up.
So much ongoing work is required to be 'relevant'. I get tired just thinking about it.
That's why I do remasters. Is within my time & brainpower constraints.
I prefer slackware pups, & although nowhere near as popular as debian/ubuntu ones, they
could be made outside woof-ce (there are probably other variants that could do this too).
That may be important if we cannot get more woof-ce developers (but limits offerings).

I like greengeek's idea of Puppy & Non-Puppy subforums, but am loathe to add to
rockedge's workload. To save rockedge, we could use a free forum, but somebody would
still have to maintain & moderate it, with features not as good as this is.

[amethyst]

I get the feeling that @wiak does not have a lot of affection for Puppy Linux and is deeply annoyed by metaphysical discussions on the PLDF.
As "second in command" it must be profoundly irritating for him to watch moderation with which he disagrees.

Is it possible to have two clear divisions on the forum?
eg:
1) PLDF
2) non-PLDF

The two different sub-fora could be moderated slightly differently in the sense of the non-PLDF section having no "off topic" section.

@wiak do you see any sense in that proposal?

I believe this is a good idea to split the Puppy and other divisions each with their own moderators and perhaps different logins if possible. This way any cross-section "annoyances" can be limited or eliminated. I don't want to see people badmouthing and degrading other developments consistently.

[wiak]

Is it possible to have two clear divisions on the forum?
eg:
1) PLDF
2) non-PLDF
...

@wiak do you see any sense in that proposal?

Bear in mind that the old days are gone. There are five established distros 'types' featured on this forum (EasyOS, Debiandog, Puppy Linux, KL/FirstRib-based, FatDog). That should be nothing to do with favouritism, and isn't by me. Splitting into only two sections would be a continuation of old Puppy favouritism thinking. Rather all established distro types deserve equal exposure and respect.

I don't myself favour an absolute apartheid approach on what has become a pretty small forum in terms of activity; I have always argued for a collaborative approach and equality of division in terms of organisation. In particular the front page needs to make it clear and obvious the importance and existence of the five established albeit hopefully collaborative alternatives.

Whilst clear and equal space provisions are operationaly required, those who seek actual and absolute division with majority space (their suggested 'half') given for old Puppy is not satisfactory at all in today's actual situation. Puppy is just one of five and certainly worth no more nowadays than any of the established rest.

[amethyst]

Is it possible to have two clear divisions on the forum?
eg:
1) PLDF
2) non-PLDF
...

@wiak do you see any sense in that proposal?

Bear in mind that the old days are gone. There are five established distros featured on this forum. That should be nothing to do with favouritism, and isn't by me. Splitting into only two sections would be a continuation of old Puppy favouritism thinking. Rather all established distro types deserve equal exposure and respect.

I don't myself favour an absolute apartheid approach on what has become a pretty small forum in terms of activity; I have always argued for a collaborative approach and equality of division in terms of organisation. In particular the front page needs to make it clear and obvious the importance and existence of the five established albeit hopefully collaborative alternatives.

Whilst clear and equal space provisions are operationaly required, those who seek actual and absolute division with majority space (their suggested 'half') given for old Puppy is not satisfactory at all in today's actual situation. Puppy is just one of five and certainly worth no more nowadays than any of the established rest.

I'm interested to know why you think any of the distributions should not have its own unique space, ie. Puppy separate, KL separate etc. each with its own unique and divided exposure. I would have thought you would love that situation and have nothing to do with Puppy at all. Strange...

[wiak]

If we could have changed the name of the forum into a more inclusive name such as TheKennels, that would have been appropriate and nice but domain name and SEO considerations make that pretty much unworkable so I feel we have to accept legacy forum title despite evolved pluralistic situation.

[amethyst]

If we could have changed the name of the forum into a more inclusive name such as TheKennels, that would have been appropriate and nice but domain name and SEO considerations make that pretty much unworkable so I feel we have to accept legacy forum title despite evolved pluralistic situation.

Or create your own site for the the kennels, even better. You don't really have to accept anything.

[wiak]

I have never said that distro types should not have their own space. Rather I spoke of equality of space. Distro types do I feel require their own overall development sections, but these could for example be sub-sections of more general upper level forums relating to such things as introduction to forum information, user help area, and mainstream releases: proposed structures have yet to be suggested by anyone in any level of detail.

[amethyst]

I have never said that distro types should not have their own space. Rather I spoke of equality of space. Distro types do I feel require their own overall development sections, but these could for example be sub-sections of more general upper level forums relating to such things as introduction to forum information, user help area, and mainstream releases: proposed structures have yet to be suggested by anyone in any level of detail.

Let them have their own equal space but totally separate, no cross-influence. Those who want to jump around between different distro "spaces" can have a separate login for each but no mention of another distro in a different distro's space. Keep it completely separate, no cross-influence or cross-contamination for that matter. Certain sections like for general linux programming questions could be in a general section accessible by all regardless of specific login.

[wiak]

Precord, wex, gtkwialog, makepup, and at least a dozen other of my own created utility apps were produced for Puppy Linux, and for Debiandog. Some, such as Precord, have been used in EasyOS I believe. Only very few utility apps I make were for KL/FR though obviously the FirstRib build system and the associated utilities I made for that were for building FR-based systems. I did however also make a modified version of wd_multi specially for use with Puppy Linux.

[dimkr]

I believe this is a good idea to split the Puppy and other divisions each with their own moderators and perhaps different logins if possible. This way any cross-section "annoyances" can be limited or eliminated. I don't want to see people badmouthing and degrading other developments consistently.

I mostly agree (separate login is too much IMO). Separate sections, separate moderators, nobody above the law (a moderator that likes project A can't badmouth B without getting banned). IMO this campaign to present Puppy as an inferior distro without a future is a great reason for potential contributors not to contribute, and I don't see why different projects can't coexist as long as user permissions and roles trap each user's ego in one section. I don't see genuine interest in collaboration from those that keep using this word, so I believe it would be best to adjust the forum structure based on people's actual bevahior and not the words they say.

[fr-ke]

Further, the quality of the products that the forum produces are so good, today, that I FEEL many may view and use forum's offerings, with little forum interactions.

As a long-term Puppyonly user, I can only agree with this.
Thanks

[wiak]

Unfortunately the couple of division/segregation advocates back to using thinly veiled personal attacks in their mini-gang fashion. Pity they can't concentrate on logical structure rather than continuously using such personal focus argument tactic as a diversion to avoid structural changes. The politics of apartheid was a failed project that most all in the world rejected most strongly as a very bad approach to life. Protectionism using mechanisms of division as a destructive result of fear. The rich who build walls to protect their status and lifestyle and unequal opportunity from the poor; the white from the black - attacking individuals who suggest change - trying to silence those who demand equal rights when such personal attacks are nothing but a diversion to try and avoid needed change. This thread is intended to be a discussion about forum structure so why are the same as usual divisive individuals keep bringing my name into their argument for division? Concentrate on the situation, not on your dislike of me or any other individual.

[rockedge]

Further, the quality of the products that the forum produces are so good, today, that I FEEL many may view and use forum's offerings, with little forum interactions.

This is absolutely true.

I just purged 500+ members with zero posts and within the hour got an email from a member that was wondering why suddenly he can not login and user name was not recognized. I looked into it and it turns out I deleted a member in excellent standing who has used Puppy Linux since 2011, a member of the Murga Forum and joined this forum in 2019.

He never needed to post because he finds the answers to his questions and the help he needs on the forum without ever having to post a question! He also visits on a regular basis.

All I could say was sorry and have him register again as he did but all the good stats are gone. So that presents the problem with mass purges that the filters no matter how I construct them can not determine this scenario. And it does seem there are legitimate members with zero posts. This is a problem.....how to determine this? When is a "sleeper" actually a "sleeper"?

This purge reduced the members list significantly but came with the risk of just happened.

concentrate on logical structure.....I am not for splitting the forum...the entire point here is the SEO. The distro's benefit and in fact need Puppy Linux's superior SEO ranking strength to actually get huge exposure globally. This is my #1 priority. To keep us all under one roof benefiting from each other.

Look at nature! There are many examples of cooperation for mutual benefits.

From there figure out a structure.

[wiak]

KL is by definition about 'cross influence' and collaboration. As a fruitful build mechanism KL/FirstRib-based seems to be doing pretty well and, because of the way it does not try to reinvent the major dev work done by experienced large upstream teams, is not struggling to keep up to date with movements in technology. But because of the advantages of 'cross influence' and collaboration KL is able to use huge kernels and rapidly swap in alternative kernel/module/firmware/combinations. Just saying this because the very idea of 'division' is unworkable from a KL perspective in actual reality.

[geo_c]

This thread is intended to be a discussion about forum structure so why are the same as usual divisive individuals keep bringing my name into their argument for division? Concentrate on the situation, not on your dislike of me or any other individual.

I think this discussion has been very straightforward, focused and to the point for the most part, and actually seems to illustrate a strong sense of agreement about a future direction.

But, what you are referencing as a general negative dialog tone, is an indication of the challenge of changing a community culture. I have some experience in this kind of thing from working with teams of musicians, all with their preferences, strongly held opinions, and egos (in which what "they do" is overly connected to their sense of who "they are" i.e. their identity.)

It's in that frame of reference that changing the dynamics of a community culture takes some profoundly balanced leadership. From my experience it requires leadership by example, and it's not at all impossible to do.

A huge factor seems to be modeling the use of language, which often requires not having to be seen as "right." Points can be made more effectively when an idea is framed in terms that invite people into the discussion, with the hopes that a creative solution is indeed possible, and they won't be personally judged for it. Just human nature I think.

The first major block to this kind of culture change is the habitual framing of disagreements as personal., Even it appears that the personal criticism is completely intentional, If instead of reacting to it, one attempts in good faith to turn it around and find the point of agreement, and build from only the positive constructive dialog, the tone tends to become more open, a few others may begin to moderate their tone. Some won't ever moderate, but others will.

I see so far in this discussion most agree with giving all the distros a separate section. Some of the avid Puppy users even see merits of reconsidering things like Rox and JWM, whether they would personally want to adopt that approach or not. So there's my starting point, all the other insinuations (or perceived insinuations) I would be inclined to let roll off my back. Not that I wouldn't consider the merits of those insinuations first. If they had a point, I could indeed acknowledge it and "own" it as they say. I wouldn't need to "go to the mat" defending it, and that would be noticed by many. Change happens gradually, not all at once.

Since most agree with giving all the distros a separate section, I'd like to see a discussion of a good way to do that.

Next I would want to see people's ideas on getting the word out to more people who might be interested in these distros that I consider to be the most innovative set of installation and OS usuage tools available in the Linux world at present. It took many years of dedication without compensation for these distro structures to reach their current state, and they don't deserve to fade away.

[geo_c]

But because of the advantages of 'cross influence' and collaboration KL is able to use huge kernels and rapidly swap in alternative kernel/module/firmware/combinations. Just saying this because the very idea of 'division' is unworkable from a KL perspective in actual reality.

Yes, exactly.

The reality is that all of the various approaches evolved from a diverse set of people creatively using each other's expertise. It's probably a challenge to segment off the different directions that each developer went while still keeping this cross pollination dynamic.

[fredx181]

...
Since most agree with giving all the distros a separate section, I'd like to see a discussion of a good way to do that.
....

+ 1

[Grey]

The short answer:

1. Use AI in forum distro product announcements AND find methods of displaying forum distros on DistroWatch or MajorGeeks or Sourceforge or GIT or ??? to widen the area where new/existing users will discover them.

2. Use the products that raises curiosity in a viewer to come here to follow-up and beyond. Today, 2025 for example, I would not look at any distro that does NOT have Pipewire and Wayland, OOTB. Further, for me, KDE is so far ahead of EVERY other desktop that I am now considering it for my own system for production going forward...as nothing else is fully featured to compare with their combined integrated leadership. I really dont see anyone matching what KDE has produced thus far in 2025.

3. Lastly, WE have to stop pointing to distro size as some sort of an advantage in today's world, as that advantage continues to rapidly dimension as distro size is NOT distro advantage anymore.

If natural intelligence cannot decide, then artificial intelligence is unlikely.
If the user has THIS, THIS, and THIS out of the box, and the unlimited size of the system, then how can we explain to him the benefits of using our shaggy friend? I'm not talking about maniacs with a bunch of devices and needs like myself, but about ordinary users. There are no clear proposals yet.

[geo_c]

The short answer:

1. Use AI in forum distro product announcements AND find methods of displaying forum distros on DistroWatch or MajorGeeks or Sourceforge or GIT or ??? to widen the area where new/existing users will discover them.

2. Use the products that raises curiosity in a viewer to come here to follow-up and beyond. Today, 2025 for example, I would not look at any distro that does NOT have Pipewire and Wayland, OOTB. Further, for me, KDE is so far ahead of EVERY other desktop that I am now considering it for my own system for production going forward...as nothing else is fully featured to compare with their combined integrated leadership. I really dont see anyone matching what KDE has produced thus far in 2025.

3. Lastly, WE have to stop pointing to distro size as some sort of an advantage in today's world, as that advantage continues to rapidly dimension as distro size is NOT distro advantage anymore.

If natural intelligence cannot decide, then artificial intelligence is unlikely.
If the user has THIS, THIS, and THIS out of the box, and the unlimited size of the system, then how can we explain to him the benefits of using our shaggy friend? I'm not talking about maniacs with a bunch of devices and needs like myself, but about ordinary users. There are no clear proposals yet.

It might be unworkable, but perhaps there could be an organization structure that highlights the distros by certain interest criteria. For instance:

I. Lightweight Distros current hardware capable
II. Lightweight Distos legacy hardware capable
III. Large Fully-Featured Graphical Desktops
III. Root User Distros
IV. Traditional User Group Distros
V. Rolling Release Distros

or Distros by Package manager, etc...

And instead of these sections being discussion sections, perhaps they are simply link sections that allow developers to list and include links to their particular subsection specific distro.