Puppy Linux Forum and its offering to users

[Clarity]

This is an idea: It comes about observing 'seasoned' forum members discussing the forum's delineations of distros under the "guise" of Puppy Linux, per se.

The forum is dotted with "official", unofficial, remasters, Upups, Dpups, DOGs of various sorts, a community developed distro (KLV), foreign PUPs, etc.

The common quality used to be desktops-Menus, but, seems that each developer has their own contributing to its representation while still being under the forum's seasoned monocle.

For the many who have been around awhile, we have no problem in this understanding. But for new users, whether experience in Linux or not, the forum could present a daunting picture with all of the offerings available.

Maybe a "Navigator" is needed for the forum.

I have thought a little in the past of this, but, am at a loss in how this info is to get to NEW people to this forum. And, if it is to be in the form of a webpage, how is it to be alerted to users? And where should this page showing the forum's distro varieties be placed and explained...with/without having to create its own "Forum distrowatch"?

[wiak]

It's a problem of history, but that is no excuse - there were some good changes introduced when this new forum began, but the fundamental issue was overall avoided, which is that this forum is a multi-distro Kennel, and no longer a "Puppy Linux Discussion Forum" - that change may annoy some, but why - fact is it is a change that happened and such is life. Yes, I know, I have been aggressively accused of single-handedly undermining Puppy Linux - how on earth could I manage that, I wonder??? Is Puppy so weak nowadays - if so, then that speaks for itself.

Perhaps my view of what this forum actually involves nowadays is indeed mistaken, and I should move on.

I, for example, rarely every discuss Puppy Linux. That is not the Kennel distro I generally use. Of course I mainly use what I develop (though I happily post on threads about all Kennel distros since all developments interest me and inspire me). WeeDog is neither derived nor based on Puppy Linux at all (that is where my time goes or there would probably be no contributions from me). Despite its tongue-in-cheek "WeeDog" name, WeeDog never had any interest in being a small Linux distro or a big one (it can be whichever you wish depending on what you put in the build). It is designed, using overlayfs, to be a frugal installed distro though. Previously I mainly used Ubuntu-based DebianDogs (not the Debian-based varieties). I have but tried FatDog, which looked interesting to me on a quick check, but not what I wanted or at least felt comfortable with.

I took on Void Linux in first WeeDog designs, but moved mainly to Arch Linux base (and I have a bad memory for different official package managers); I did make a FocalFossa-based very small weedog and produced a dpkg/apt addon sfs out of the build process for that for use with FossaPup (and thus experimented again with Puppy for a while). Puppy is okay - main distinction from my point of view is that it is basically a single-user distro whilst I often want multi-user facilities though more often than not configure all distros to autoboot as root to the desktop - though I do consider that a lazy/convenient habit on my part; I can work fine with sudo thunar and start up a root terminal from there...

The forum continues to promote Puppy Linux as dominating all other concerns (in moderator blurb and in top of forum main space allocation). Despite the history, I think that is a no longer at all truthful or valid promotion. This forum, like it or not, is at best (assuming collaboration, which should be encouraged not fought against via segregation) "The Kennel Linux Discussion Forum" and should be re-structured properly to promote that diversity. Yes, we have been in that discussion before, but only in a non-starting sort of way which began with the attitude that this is the Puppy Linux forum so that dominance must remain, which basically wastes the place and makes it less interesting and attractive (certainly to myself - I push myself to keep developing and contributing what I do, used or not, but my talk of vanishing cannot help but surface sometimes and that is not some stupid threat but simply a growing desire to get away from what I don't find useful to my own pursuits of interests. I may be better moving my work to my own space and forget about user feedback and discussion - if only to free up time for other pressing purposes. My 'own space' might just be my house! - I am fine with that - I certainly have no need to piggy-back on Puppy name or historic status - in fact I think that association may hold back new developments when the forum remains organised as that "Puppy, rather than Kennel, Linux Discussion Forum".

I hasten to add that I do not at all blame rockedge for any of the above situation. He inherited the puppy domain for forum use and the diplomatic issues that made drastic change pretty much impossible. But the outside audience decides everything in the end - if the forum begins to become but a small club of mainly old guys then real re-organisation will be needed earlier rather than too late. Maybe Kennel Linux Discussion Forum will fail to attract much new activity either, but one has to try somehow, hmmm... or move on to the pub instead.

Oh, by the way, no... I do not want WeeDog ever to be referred as Puppy variant blah blah blah just to keep Puppy name dominant here - forget that strategy. WDL not Puppy at all, not DebianDog either, not FatDog either - forget that silly idea if you have it.

[wiak]

Can of worms... shouldn't open it again. Sorry. Forget it. Each to their own.

Rockedge working hard for the best. That's why I hang around really. I'm sure some would love if I would vanish. Don't worry guys I don't stay just to annoy you. In fact I find division and divided opinions incredibly tiring and off-putting, but when forum appears less active to me I sometimes post more, as if to compensate, but develop less.

But I'm beginning to believe that developing stuff doesn't matter now to anybody much anyway - weedogit may have been a mistake since it also made me see and use a lot of other distros and then decide not to bother developing my own... Only thing is, despite it using WDL initrd, I wasn't really attracted to KLV-Airedale for much of the time, but more recently I find myself increasing enthusiastic about it and 'stealing' desktop tweaks from big upstream distros (like Zorin) such that my variant tweak of KLV-Airedale becoming just as user-friendly and attractive and functional in use to me as many/most of these huge weedogged distros weedogit has conveniently allowed me to easily play with. So that much, on the forum, is working for me, but I do feel KLV-Airedale is buried away in almost invisible sub-sub-sub sort of area, which means it is also not being used to attract in any new users or activity overall.

Forum not working for me; sorry, rockedge.

Anyone left with any enthusiastic ideas for this forum? I am struggling in that respect, but life goes on so definitely not a major worry. By all means, please kick me off if that would help.

[wiak]

Imagine all the distros
it's easy if you try
No one Pup to rule us all,
which really is a lie

Imagine all these distros
which really ache to fly
No need to clip their wings
to save that Puppy guy

Imagine one warm kennel
bright sparks and flames and light
No-one claiming one thing
is best and pure and right

Woof-CE official Pup
the rest must be derived
So hide them in that section
and pray that they will die

And if each day this forum shrinks
and the sparks all fly away
Imagine that dark empty Void
Just you, but none to play

What topic is this anyway? "I'm not a poet, and I know it"?!

[amethyst]

Anyone want to create a poll with regards to whether this forum should be a general forum where all distro's should have "equal standing" to Puppy? Personally, I would vote against it. For me this is primarily a Puppy Linux forum which was created after the previous Puppy forum went down, the intellectual capital transferred and the legacy is continued here. I think there is a place for other distro's here but in my view should be featured as "sideline business" (attractions or distractions however you want to view it). Rockedge has graciously allowed space for these other ventures. My question would be why some may want to actively promote/favor other distributions to Puppy on a Puppy forum? Why not create your own forum,blog or whatever to promote and boost your own distro, etc. If this becomes a general linux discussion forum (and most agree with it), all specific references to Puppy LInux (like the name of the forum) should be changed. I think it will be a sad day if that happens...

[Flash]

I think this forum should be limited to Puppy Linux and its extended family. Stay within our area of expertise. To officially open the forum to other distros would create even more chaos than already exists.

[Grey]

Kennel

There is a lot of talk about the Kennel here. How I see the problem (not the solution).
The problem is that each kennel is designed for a certain number of dogs. When this amount is exceeded, problems with the maintenance of pets begin.

The American writer O. Henry has an interesting story "The Roads We Take". A story about life choices, what will happen if you turn the wrong way. There are three bandits robbing a mail car during the Wild West. In the end, two people remain alive and one of them, Dodson, nicknamed Shark, kills his partner, whose horse broke his leg. There remains only one healthy horse, Bolivar, and Shark says "Bolivar can't carry double". In the end, the aged Shark becomes a financial tycoon and drives his partner to suicide, who asks him for a postponement. "Bolivar can't carry double".

In Russia, the phrase originally meant that when choosing between benefits and friendship, preference is given to benefits. However, currently the saying "Bolivar can't carry double" is also used in the sense that if it becomes difficult to combine two options at the same time, then one of them needs to be eliminated.

Shark Dodson (right), Bob Tidball and Bolivar according to the version of the Russian film shot in 1962 (okay, Soviet, they don't make such good films now):

Shark Dodson (right), Bob Tidball and Bolivar.jpg (136.77 KiB) Viewed 1301 times

[wiak]

I think this forum should be limited to Puppy Linux and its extended family. Stay within our area of expertise. To officially open the forum to other distros would create even more chaos than already exists.

That's why current weedog's FirstRib (FR) build system and components such as its general most-any-distro-rootfilesystem usable overlayfs-based initrd is moving. It is not derived from Puppy Linux at all and whilst a distro built via that FR build system could be made to look/act like a Puppy that was never part of the design intentions, which are much broader/generic in concept. FR isn't owned or administered by woof-CE Puppy dev team, and does not fit well in a sub-forum as a non-pure-Puppy/Dog at all (other than my unfortunate choice of WeeDog for its name - that naming-error is now being remedied back to its original FirstRib project name).

FR build system and components and built distros remain developed and maintained and freely available to all Linux users of course, but moving out of its current artificial belonging to Puppy as a sub-distro "Dog" status. Should never have been published here, and that is my fault - I was focussing on the discussion nature of the forum, which I had been in for years, rather than the fact that FirstRib is completely an alternative to a Puppy design of distro, so should stand on its own and leave Puppy to its own forum space, which dominates this scene above all Distros discussed here anyway - which is fair enough in that view of pure woof-CE or Puppy-derived and so on.

KLV, as I understand it, uses parts of various distros including repos and official package managers from in-forum-here or upstream, including FR-initrd at its overlayfs control frugal install 'system heart' and auto-login to root desktop behaviour pattern, so that is a different matter. I wouldn't call it a mongrel, nor unpure - just versatile. Despite being housed elsewhere, FR build system (and weedogit and so on) will remain usable to anyone, including KLV of course if so chosen to be used.

Certainly my long (years and years, I know) argued view of what this forum had become over time, in terms of diversity of focus, was a very different one from that older Puppy Linux centric forum model, which I felt had already been overtaken by actual work undertaken by forum members. My relentless argument was that that (artificial as I saw it) restriction of sticking to a Puppy-centric model would result in decaying interest similar to what I perceive as similar decay in forums for other older tiny distros such as Slitaz and tinycorelinux; they survive to a greater or lesser extent as distros in this now-fertile Linux universe, but forum discussion activity about innovation and new methodologies in distro operation and design is a different matter and thus viewpoint altogether.

However, I cannot deny that at least three of the four moderators of this forum (not including admins) are all Puppy-centric in terms of their focus and woof-CE so-called 'pure' and 'unpure' builds advocacy, and that their thread/topic regular moving behaviour, and comments, have re-inforced that Puppy Linux distro umbrella (kennels) control model.

Concepts of 'Purity' in terms of a distro's build process have no interest to me at all personally - I being just interested in forum discussion about interesting Linux technology and related in-forum-house diversity and innovation in undertaken development, but lack of forum activity tends to make a forum of less interest to me also. But, though I do understand the other, traditional Puppy-centric stance, I do think you should remember that a distro build system (woof-CE) is a completely different entity than a discussion forum, unless it has been constructed in some integrated fashion that results in the forum also being the place all of a distro's developers have their discussions and handle user and feedback reports.

Yes, dimkr, contributes big-time to woof-CE at its github site (and I believe moderates what is accepted or rejected there), and occupies his own Puppy Linux forum slots on this forum so, I suppose, you can pass most future official-woof-CE build and non-official Puppy Linux distro build development questions over to him.

If you are reading this post as a new to the forum member, it may be of interest to you that some alternatives to old relatively traditional Puppy Linux design do exist elsewhere in smaller first-page 'forum' section of the forum, but not in the dominant 'General Information', 'Mainline Distributions', 'House Training; Beginner's Help, User's Help, Bug Reports, and Instructional HOW-TO section, large (4 subforums) 'Advanced Topics' section or under large (6 subforums) 'International' section. Just look for what the moderators occasionally call the "Dogs" - they are listed on the front page of the forum further down the page.

You will however find that the majority of moderator-led discussion concerns Puppy Linux alone, but, as I indicate above, there is plenty of alternative distro discussion elsewhere if you know about it and know where to look.

Though rockedge is the owner/principal admin of this Puppy Linux forum he has to of course listen to the membership and particularly to the official moderators (and other admins) in terms of content and organisation, so the Puppy-centric focus is a result of that pressure and influence and has been discussed and debated many times already. It is up to developers of any so-called Dog therefore to determine for themselves what is satisfactory to them unless the 'team' moderators or admins chuck them out in the end I suppose, which is probably unlikely to happen since rockedge has his own views that, I believe, take precedence in the end no matter overall opinions.

Hope things pick up and more Linux fans join and contribute to discussions here - whilst it is nice to see many of the (getting) old faces here still, new blood and new ideas breathes life into any forum and distro developments.

[wiak]

Anyone want to create a poll with regards to whether this forum should be a general forum where all distro's should have "equal standing" to Puppy? Personally, I would vote against it. For me this is primarily a Puppy Linux forum which was created after the previous Puppy forum went down, the intellectual capital transferred and the legacy is continued here. I think there is a place for other distro's here but in my view should be featured as "sideline business" (attractions or distractions however you want to view it). Rockedge has graciously allowed space for these other ventures. My question would be why some may want to actively promote/favor other distributions to Puppy on a Puppy forum? Why not create your own forum,blog or whatever to promote and boost your own distro, etc. If this becomes a general linux discussion forum (and most agree with it), all specific references to Puppy LInux (like the name of the forum) should be changed. I think it will be a sad day if that happens...

Fair point, depends what you want to be available, maintained, developed, or discussed here. If discussion and overall forum activity falls below a certain level a forum becomes irrelevant since not enough going on to attract visitors. As long as you are sure you don't mind loss of other efforts than Puppy from here - and at least in the form of discussion/feedback about these then your argument is fine. Most non-Puppy distros just stay anyway - but they are not promoted much in terms of a new user likely knowing about them - Puppy centric model is understandable but does mean your rely on Puppy itself being the magnet to attract new members to the discussion forum.

Your own interests are in what you develop for Puppy of course, so your view is also expected. As in my own from a different perspective.

[wiak]

The problem is that each kennel is designed for a certain number of dogs. When this amount is exceeded, problems with the maintenance of pets begin.

This is true of course. And related problem is that no pet should be neglected or pampered more than any other.

Nor should there be any form of age-ism where an older pet is perceived as having lower relevance or status and treated accordingly. The pet model is a bit weak when discussing Linux distributions.

[Grey]

And related problem is that no pet should be neglected or pampered more than any other.

In the dog breeding books (or in the rules of forum), yes. But in reality there is always the most beloved puppy, and sometimes each family member has his own. The cutest, the furriest, the most-the-most

[wiak]

And related problem is that no pet should be neglected or pampered more than any other.

In the dog breeding books (or in the rules of forum), yes. But in reality there is always the most beloved puppy, and sometimes each family member has his own. The cutest, the furriest, the most-the-most

Not in the rules of this forum.

Yes babies, human or otherwise, are cute

But Puppy is old with white whiskers on its snout.

[amethyst]

Fair point, depends what you want to be available, maintained, developed, or discussed here. If discussion and overall forum activity falls below a certain level a forum becomes irrelevant since not enough going on to attract visitors. As long as you are sure you don't mind loss of other efforts than Puppy from here - and at least in the form of discussion/feedback about these then your argument is fine. Most non-Puppy distros just stay anyway - but they are not promoted much in terms of a new user likely knowing about them - Puppy centric model is understandable but does mean your rely on Puppy itself being the magnet to attract new members to the discussion forum.

The Puppy Linux Forum has been around for many years and has survived the transfer to a new server and other changes. I'm not too worried that it will become "irrelevant" soon. As for the promotion of other distro's/ventures of other developers, I think you may be underplaying this forum's role in this. I think the distro's of other developers are indeed promoted and benefited in a way by having their ventures exposed on this forum to an existing user base. Wouldn't be that easy if they had to establish their own forum, promote it themselves and build their own "client base".

[wiak]

I think the distro's of other developers are indeed promoted and benefited in a way by having their ventures exposed on this forum to an existing user base. Wouldn't be that easy if they had to establish their own forum, promote it themselves and build their own "client base".

It would certainly be a different audience. Doesn't matter to me one way or another in fact except that collaboration is interesting to me since this is has been a hobby of mine for a long time.

I won't be trying to prove any advantage or disadvantage not discussing my distro build system components or other hobby-developments here - is irrelevant to me, and can't see me bothering to further announce/advertise whatever I publish later - did plenty of that before, on this forum, since it seemed possible to me that some of my contributions might interest others and help boost forum activity and membership. Quite possibly didn't. I can't imagine anyone who wasn't a member of this forum or a guest to it has ever, for example, used weedogit, even though it is mainly useful for making frugal installations of outside distros. I have never promoted that work anywhere at all outside of here - I don't really intend to.

I have no clients from my perspective - which is good, because having clients would make me feel responsible to them in a way I don't want to be. Everything is just optional and no-one obliged - if a person asked for something to be added or fixed I almost always did it even if I didn't always use the addition myself, but that's as much because this is just a hobby for me anyway, so nice to improve via feedback.

Feedback is missed of course if continuing to undertake a hobby without providing a place for such feedback, but that is balanced by time released to get on with other things - been a lot of work at times, but my choice to do.

Yes, this discussion forum's client base, some of whom are Puppy enthusiasts, but others not so distro specific or using one of the other distros such as DDs, provided a lot of useful reports and feedback at times, which I'm grateful for.

[wiak]

I'm not too worried that it will become "irrelevant" soon.

In the literal sense, I'm not worried either. Relevance is a relative term - I have no doubt the forum, however it develops, will by definition remain relevant to those who enter and participate in it. I was meaning relevance in terms of activity and greater Linux universe involvement - increasing member numbers, new blood including increasing numbers of innovative developers, and most of all 'Entertainment' since a forum is a social meeting place and source of entertainment as much as anything else, or so it seems to me. Have you ever used the word 'boring' in posts you have made regarding concern for how things in this forum are going? Perhaps you haven't, but some have - I guess the forum has not been providing them with that essential ingredient of entertainment they are also looking for, and trying to 'entertain', including via 'toys', is one of the reason I have participated here, despite not using Puppy Linux at all hardly since 2013 (when I instead used DebianDogs for six or seven years).

[vtpup]

It think it's difficult to talk about anything without a commonly agreed definition of what that thing is. Or, more accurately, it's easy to talk about something undefined, but meaningless to do so. It provides fuel for endless debate, because no conclusion can ever be reached.

I think that defining what Puppy Linux is is an important step to understanding to what it is not.

I do think that the forum is and should be maintained as a Puppy Linux forum focused on promoting, supporting, developing, and continuing Puppy Linux. Likewise, I don't think of this as a Small Linux Forum, and Alternative Linux Forum, an Overlay Linux Forum, though those all might be valuable and useful websites I would visit. But I hope that this forum will continue to be a Puppy Linux forum.

If so, I think the term Puppy Linux should be clearly defined, so that it is understood by all what is actually meant by that. And I think a LOT of thought ought to be given to that, and its ramifications for the future of this brand of Linux. A clear definition should reflect its historical philosophy, its goals, its general appearance and capabilities, and it's aims. It should be a definition informed by a clear understanding of its perceived niche within the scope of Linux operating systems.

On the other hand this understanding of what Puppy Linux is, should be a defining of MINIMUM (rather than comprehensive) requirements to qualify, so that full scope of development and variations WITHIN those bounds is possible while still remaining Puppy Linux.

Then it would be clear what Puppy Linux is, and isn't. It would give those who want to develop Puppy Linux guidelines to work within and it would not create confusion. A fork would be clearly a fork, and that would be the choice of someone who decided they did not want to produce a Puppy Linux. Everyone would have a clear understanding of what they want to do.

One of the problems with promoting Puppy Linux now is in not having a clear idea of its definition. How can you go into detail of what its advantages are if you don't know what it is? How can you explain why someone should use it if you don't know precisely what you are referring to? How can you create a new version of Puppy Linux? How do you know if it is one?

Another problem created without a definition is in support. Another is in development. Another is in instruction and documentation. Finally it is a problem in community effort. It is nearly impossible to work together with purpose and apportion effort in any project if there is no definition of what is being accomplished.

By "definition" I do not mean an inflexible, unalterable, written in stone anchor around everyone's neck. A definition can be changed over time, when it becomes needful to do so because of changing technological and social developments. BUT there should always be a current EXPRESSED definition, whatever it consists of, as well as an organized and SPECIFIED means to change it.

So, before even determining what would best be served by a forum (or anything else) with regard to Puppy Linux, I strongly suggest that people first sit down, think about, and define clearly what Puppy Linux is, in concrete terms, gain consensus, and then work out how that is to be supported.

[wiak]

I do think that the forum is and should be maintained as a Puppy Linux forum focused on promoting, supporting, developing, and continuing Puppy Linux. On the other hand, I don't think of this as a Small Linux Forum, and Alternative Linux Forum, an Overlay Linux Forum, though those all might be valuable and useful websites I would visit.

Well DebianDog isn't Puppy Linux, even if some might argue it is like Puppy Linux in some key functions (but so are several external distros to this forum such as AntiX and Slax I think). Certainly, the original DebianDog was intended to have a similar size to Puppy Linux, and a similar look and functionality - so in that sense it could be said DebianDog at least was to some extent 'inspired' by Puppy look an feel, but not derived from it.

WeeDog (FirstRib) build system, on the other hand, was not designed at all with Puppy Linux in mind in terms of look, feel, inspiration, or size. The old Puppy forum just happened to be the discussion forum I had used for years, so I just opened a thread to offer the scripts for my distro build system to anyone interested. So developing FirstRib had nothing at all to do with 'promoting, supporting, developing, or continuing Puppy Linux'; it was just a new distro build system of my own that used the official package manager of Void Linux and an initrd I designed from scratch to boot it (which is also what resulted in weedogit system I was also publishing in this forum).

Updates allowed firstrib/weedog build system to build Arch Linux, Debian, Ubuntu, or Devuan alternatives, but still with no Puppy Linux parts involved whatsoever or for any promotion of Puppy Linux distro itself in mind. Promoting the forum in terms of trying to entertain and increase activity is a different matter and objective for me - no longer used Puppy Linux for many years at that time, though did still sometimes contribute little utility apps in dotpet form for its users.

So no matter any agreed definition of what Puppy Linux distro itself is (and that's nevertheless a good idea overall for Puppy I think), WeeDog (FirstRib) simply isn't Puppy Linux. Yes frugal installed, but many other distros not from this forum can also be frugal installed, and from the very beginning in early 2019, WeeDog used overlayfs (not aufs) with totally different/unrelated initrd code.

Best then, by 'definition' model of what is appropriate on this forum, I hadn't posted about it here then. Well I did, but no harm done(?)

[vtpup]

It's impossible to say what is or is isn't a Puppy Linux, if one doesn't have a clear definition of what that is. There are infinite possibilities. A definition that says it has a specified look and feel, actually could be a definition. A definition could also be a single user system built by WoofCE. Or a definition could be both. Or a definition could be anything anyone wants to call a Puppy. Or a definition could be 30 different charactersitics. Or structures. Or methods. Or relations to other OSs repositories.

A clearly expressed concrete definition does not presently exist. So any consideration about what is and what isn't a Puppy will fail (or go on endlessly) because the question is unanswerable.

After that is established, as far as what "belongs" on the forum, that is easy to answer. Whatever Rockedge who has generously spent tremendous time and resources so far necessary to present, maintain, and encourage us to continue here, wants. Period.

If at that point however it would be felt helpful to have a discussion about the forum (rather than add to his burden) then I again think a prior stated and agreed to definition of Puppy Linux would enable more productive considerations.

[backi]

Want to give my Standpoint.....if anybody is interested in.....as a simple maybe (too) naive"End-user".

I am not much interested in Definitions or Philosophies.
I am in no Way a "Purist"...... more an "Eclectic"....(Eclectic Definition: Methods, beliefs, ideas, etc. that are eclectic combine whatever seem the best or most useful things from many different areas or systems, rather than following a single system: )

The only Thing which counts for me is Functionality.....that those "Things" are doing their "Job" as expected.

I have no Problem with the (Co)Existens of all those Dogs,Puppies;Rips and/or their Derivates,Remasters,Projects or God knows how it is called or as what is posted/presented here under the Title "Puppy Linux Forum".

Even if this may look or seem to be a bit chaotic.It really does not bother me (personally) very much.

I regard it as some Kind of non-linear creative Chaos.(Ordo Ab Chao....Order out of Chaos).....and enjoy it somehow...from Time to Time....(My life anyway is`nt centered around Linux or Computers).

So... you Boys.... and Girls of course..... don`t worry (too much)...... better be happy instead .

Is there any Life beyond (Puppy) Linux?
I do believe in it

Best Wishes and Peace on Earth !

Keep on rocking!

[vtpup]

Chaos is always an option. However it sucks as an OS, blank screen and all. Generally it takes organization to produce something like the microprocessor which we both communicate through, otherwise it's just a bit of silica sand.

Of course beaches are fine things, too . And if asked personally whether I'd prefer to go back to the pre-PC days, say 1974, sure, I'd sign up.

[backi]

@vtpup wrote :

Chaos is always an option. However it sucks as an OS, blank screen and all. Generally it takes organization to produce something like the microprocessor which we both communicate through, otherwise it's just a bit of silica sand.

Of course beaches are fine things, too . And if asked personally whether I'd prefer to go back to the pre-PC days, say 1974, sure, I'd sign up.

There seem to be some slight Undertone of Desperation in your Comment...i could be wrong.........but nevertheless..... don`t worry .....be happy.

[bigpup]

What is Puppy Linux is stated here:
https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/

[Clarity]

This post was opened as a request for thought on how to improve forum distro selections, identification, and navigation. ... mostly a NAVIGATOR for the forums' varied offering.

Since the opening post's opening in this area of the forum, much concern is now raised elsewhere in the forum as to what this forum should contain.

What is contained in this forum does NOT improve or make NAVIGATION easier; nor make NAVIGATION not needed.

Today, I see calls for separations from the forum of NON-PUP WoofCE distros. This subtle requests is that @BarryK's offering should be moved, @fatdog's offering should be moved, @rcrsn51's and @fredx181's offering should be moved, @wiak's WDL offering should be moved, and KLV .... into some off-forum sites versus this PLDF site. In my words, move these to "silos" elsewhere.

What will happen to the likes of @mistfire's offering and @norgo's offering and @exton's offering whose desktops & menus are slightly different???

And what should be done with WoofCE "experimentals" which have no intentions of being a traditional PUP or those that do not follow norms.

I hope we are not gravitating into a religious war of whose God is the correct one. (This is NOT A RELIGIOUS STATEMENT...its only used as a metaphor!!! )

I think we will need some NAVIGATION to these silos considering their connected history.

[williwaw]

After that is established, as far as what "belongs" on the forum, that is easy to answer. Whatever Rockedge who has generously spent tremendous time and resources so far necessary to present, maintain, and encourage us to continue here, wants. Period.

this,

@bigpup

What is Puppy Linux is stated here:
https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/

Does this include unofficial also? I certainly hope so.

62.png (15.46 KiB) Viewed 1104 times

[vtpup]

The page referred to by Bigpup is a good start on one approach to definition but I see it as more of an explanation to newcomers without any idea what Puppy is than an actual defining statement as a guideline to the scope of OS developments. There are some areas it would be helpful to clarify.

1.) Who is the author?
2.) What was the intention?
3.) re Official Releases, Who is the "Puppy Linux Team" and how is that composition determined?
4.) re Official Releases, the word "generally" is used re. "generally built using Puppy Linux system builder (called Woof-CE).."
5.) re. Unofficial Releases, The word "usually" is used "are usually remasters..."

In general, to me this statement seems quite open, and flexible. There are official distributions and unofficial distributions under the Puppy Linux banner. it does not state that WoofCE is an absolute requirement for either official or unofficial Puppy Linux distributions. It says that the Puppy Linux Team determines which distributions are official. It says there are a shared set of applications and tools. It is unclear if any specific tool or application or set of tools and applications is required in order to qualify as either an official or unofficial distribution under the Puppy Linux Banner.

[wiak]

What is Puppy Linux is stated here:
https://puppylinux-woof-ce.github.io/

Obviously that is a sort of Puppy Linux woof-CE developers' official definition of Puppy Linux itself, which is developed on woof-ce github site. But that has nothing to do with any other distro discussed on this forum. Most every other distro that has been represented on this forum have their own github or gitlab or similar development sites too (some also have their own additional separate forum - which maybe Puppy itself should also?).

The other distros (most all distinct from each other) are not developed via woof-CE, so your above woof-CE development site info is clearly not answering the matter being debated at all. Well, it is from the point of view of stating that only woof-CE or (pre-woof-CE) BarryK derived distros should be discussed on this forum if that's what you are trying to say in a rather cloaked manner.

Is that what your opinion is (?) - if so, please state that directly. The matter being debated is what the "offerings should be to user" on this Puppy Linux Forum, not simply a call to define what Puppy Linux distro itself is - many of us here do not care about Puppy Linux discussions but login to this forum to join discussions about the other distros on their threads here.

If you or anyone else are suggesting this forum is just for Puppy Linux then your problem would first then be to convince rockedge of that, and second to find a polite way to ask the other distros to move their discussion sections out. Rockedge certainly has the right to tell other distros to 'leave' this forum. But it is also the case that the developer/creator(s) of any of the 'Other' distros have their own right to move their distro discussions off the forum if they want to put them somewhere else - Puppy Linux owns no other distro and certainly not any discussions/feedback mechanisms about it.

Bear in mind, however, that that is not the status quo actual situation - been discussing the likes of the DebianDogs here for almost ten years now.

Puppy Linux as a distro in its own right certainly contains a lot of different releases, some deemed 'official and pure' by woof-CE definitions, and some not official but still derived from previous woof-CE builds or from the earlier, very old now, BarryK created pups. How Puppy defines itself doesn't actually concern me, but I certainly don't think their current definition is a particularly good one - but that's up to their own creator/developers.

The other distros also discussed on this forum simply are not Puppy and no re-definition can make them so. And certainly only their own developers can define what and 'who' their distros are and how they wish to publish them.

[wiak]

The page referred to by Bigpup is a good start on one approach to definition but I see it as more of an explanation to newcomers without any idea what Puppy is than an actual defining statement as a guideline to the scope of OS developments. There are some areas it would be helpful to clarify.

1.) Who is the author?
2.) What was the intention?
2.) re Official Releases, Who is the "Puppy Linux Team" and how is that composition determined?
3.) re Official Releases, the word "generally" is used re. "generally built using Puppy Linux system builder (called Woof-CE).."
4.) re. Unofficial Releases, The word "usually" is used "are usually remasters..."

In general, to me this statement seems quite open, and flexible. There are official distributions and unofficial distributions under the Puppy Linux banner. it does not state that WoofCE is an absolute requirement for either official or unofficial Puppy Linux distributions. It says that the Puppy Linux Team determines which distributions are official. It says there are a shared set of applications and tools. It is unclear if any specific tool or application or set of tools and applications is required in order to qualify as either an official or unofficial distribution under the Puppy Linux Banner.

The problem with above is that some of us at least have no strong interest in Puppy Linux distro itself (nothing against it, but my interest here is stimulating forum discussion/activity) - once did use Puppy, but long time ago. Do participate on this forum, but with own projects/distro developments or interested in work of others who are also nothing to do with Puppy Linux development. Like I said, many of us also operate with our own team of developers and/or github or gitlab sites for developing whatever we work on. Nothing to do with Puppy Linux distro, which has its own development team - I believe they refer to themselves as 'stewards', but that is their woof-CE site - different place. I am pretty sure bigpup nothing to do with that either, not a steward at woof-CE, neither are the other moderators of this forum - rockedge might have been invited as such there - I don't know. Nothing to do with me anyway.

Collaboration is never about one entity defining or controlling another - it simply can't.

[vtpup]

Wiak, again I'm not trying to define what the forum should consist of, but trying to work out what Puppy Linux is to everyone here, including you.

I'm trying to make that distinction clear because it is the source of a lot of misunderstanding.

A forum consists of whatever the owner decides it does. It can be multiple unrelated operating systems. I'm not trying to define the forum, I'm searching for what we think Puppy is..

[rockedge]

I believe they refer to themselves as 'stewards'.

I made up that designation so I can refer to a group of people in one statement. Think of it as a pointer to an array of the actual values.

plus it has an "official" ring to it.

Pretty nifty I say........

[wiak]

Wiak, again I'm not trying to define what the forum should consist of, but trying to work out what Puppy Linux is to everyone here, including you.

I'm trying to make that distinction clear because it is the source of a lot of misunderstanding.

A forum consists of whatever the owner decides it does. It can be multiple unrelated operating systems. I'm not trying to define the forum, I'm searching for what we think Puppy is..

Yes, that's fine vtpup, but the 'including you' remark isn't relevant - I don't have any interest in 'how Puppy Linux itself as a distro wants to define itself'. Like I say, I have no particular interest myself in Puppy Linux! I am sure a Puppy Linux clearer definition will be useful to its fans and users. But I don't need such information myself - what's it to me?