nominations for puppy on distrowatch

[amethyst]

I can probably make S15Pup64 from ScPup64 fairly quickly now that I've done S15Pup32

The real PITA is that Samba has to be recompiled to match the older libs in Slackware-15.0.....

Well, go ahead. Community will decide between dimkr's and your efforts. Slacko is a bit unknown to me, have never used it. I tend to go with the ubuntu/debian releases.

[Jasper]

@geo_c

I just grabbed your $$Bling$$, thank you for this compilation and for making it so easy to customise and I am sure will give my OS a brand new feel

@peebee
I have never used Slackware before and I did read up on it yesterday evening and I was aware that it has a large repository of applications available and is a stable system. I too would be interested in a x64 build of your current work.

[ozsouth]

@peebee - yes, S15Pup-64 would be a welcome addition. The 32bit one worked fine - no real surprises, just your usual reliable pup.

[amethyst]

@peebee How about producing your version of a 64-bit debian or ubuntu based puppy for this venture? Maybe an up to date ubuntu one which seems lacking...

[wiak]

I have an alternative to propose:

1. Declare woof-CE as the new "official" Puppy
2. Start a stable branch of woof-CE and tag a new release from it (say, 10.0)
3. Backport select bugfixes to this branch (equivalent to the woof-CE branch Vanilla Dpup is built from) as they're merged into latest woof-CE
4. Tag a new minor release every once in a while (10.1, 10.2 ...), which include nothing but those extra fixes
5. On every minor release, create releases for all build configurations in the table at https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... py-builder (or just a subset) and use the woof-CE version as their version

That suggestion makes sense to me. The once in a while release schedule suggested would remove future problem satisfying Distrowatch. Once user comes to Puppy forum or visits Puppy homepage they are likely to see the alternatives (important they are listed on Puppy main website though and given equal exposure on the forum itself). Other distros that are not Puppy need to notify Distrowatch themselves if they so choose, but they should also be given equal exposure on the forum and all will benefit from any increased traffic, which is probably badly needed these days.

[wanderer]

hi all

S15 pup is built with woof-ce
peebee has built a 32 bit S15
and is working on a 64 bit S15

dimkr proposes making woof-ce the official puppy
and maintaining a stable branch
with a new starting woof-ce pup
that will have regular incremental bug fix updates

it seems that these two projects should be combined
with peebees S15 being the first version
posted on the distrowatch page

we will then make available the massive packet of bling
that will make these puppies look like everything under the sun

on the distrowatch page we will make clear
that there is an official line of puppies

but there is also a vast and diverse puppy world
that can be explored by coming to the forum

that way everyone is working together
like a community

wanderer

[peebee]

@peebee How about producing your version of a 64-bit debian or ubuntu based puppy for this venture? Maybe an up to date ubuntu one which seems lacking...

I have enough on my plate thank you - you will have to look to "others" for Debian and 64-bit Ubuntu - I won't be doing them anytime soon.

[wanderer]

hi peebee

your S15 pup is great (as usual)
using it now

my vote is for it to be the first new official puppy on our distrowatch page

do not be distracted by the inevitable endless demands

thanks again for all your work

wanderer

[amethyst]

I'm voting for what dimkr suggested.

[dogcat]

My opinion.(yes, everybody has one!)
This thread's offerings and suggestions need condensing (my opinion!).

Please keep in mind that distrowatch is not going to accept something that has already been represented on distrowatch. That means no bionicpup, no fossapup, no slacko 7.xx puppy, etc. It is up to distrowatch whether they accept it, no guarantee there. Read the rules. https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resou ... noannounce
---
Facts.
The chosen release will need to be ready to go. The release needs to be a puppy. The release should finally be approved by 01Micko (he is active in woof-CE on github and will probably chime in when necessary)

peebee's post with download links to his offerings, both the 32-bit and 64-bit are new, as yet unrepresented on distrowatch.
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 915#p70915
---
Additional Facts.
dimkr did not offer his vanilladpup. Disqualified. (he did say it is ok to modify and change the name but he will have nothing to do with it?)
peebee did not offer his voidpup. Disqualified.

Other suggestions disqualify because: distrowatch will not accept a recycled version of what has been already released. Please read the rules. https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resou ... noannounce

[wanderer]

hi all

S15 pup is

new
woof-ce (compatible with dimkrs plan)
suggested by barry k
has a lead maintainer
almost totally completed (peebee has a 32 bit and is working on a 64 bit)

lets focus on that for the next distrowatch submission

wanderer

[amethyst]

My opinion.(yes, everybody has one!)
This thread's offerings and suggestions need condensing (my opinion!).

Please keep in mind that distrowatch is not going to accept something that has already been represented on distrowatch. That means no bionicpup, no fossapup, no slacko 7.xx puppy, etc. It is up to distrowatch whether they accept it, no guarantee there. Read the rules. https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resou ... noannounce
---
Facts.
The chosen release will need to be ready to go. The release needs to be a puppy. The release should finally be approved by 01Micko (he is active in woof-CE on github and will probably chime in when necessary)

peebee's post with download links to his offerings, both the 32-bit and 64-bit are new, as yet unrepresented on distrowatch.
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 915#p70915
---
Additional Facts.
dimkr did not offer his vanilladpup. Disqualified. (he did say it is ok to modify and change the name but he will have nothing to do with it?)
peebee did not offer his voidpup. Disqualified.

Other suggestions disqualify because: distrowatch will not accept a recycled version of what has been already released. Please read the rules. https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resou ... noannounce

Did you read dimkr's suggestions? Here: https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 978#p70978

[bigpup]

For sure you need a 64bit version of whatever.

A lot of programs are now only released as 64bit.

Offering a 32bit version is also a good idea.

[bigpup]

Does S15 pup have a topic?

[dogcat]

Did you read dimkr's suggestions? Here: https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 978#p70978

Yes I read that but the issue at hand right now is to have a release of puppy submitted to distrowatch before january 4th, 2023. That is 66 days from today.

------------------------

For sure you need a 64bit version of whatever.

A lot of programs are now only released as 64bit.

Offering a 32bit version is also a good idea.

Yes, a 64-bit version would be best to draw continued interest. Distrowatch has featured 64-bit puppy versions exclusively since bionicpup was released. Anyone following links to the puppy forum from distrowatch will run into plenty of 32-bit offerings, a mention of that in the description provided to distrowatch could cover that. Time is of the essence!

Does S15 pup have a topic?

I have not seen it mentioned anywhere except this thread.

[peebee]

Does S15 pup have a topic?

Not yet - it's basically identical to ScPup just using Slackware-15.0 instead of Slackware-Current components.

[geo_c]

Did you read dimkr's suggestions? Here: https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 978#p70978

Yes I read that but the issue at hand right now is to have a release of puppy submitted to distrowatch before january 4th, 2023. That is 66 days from today.

dimkr's idea seems good, because it's an adjustment to the reality on the ground, but it may not fit into the time constraints of the distrowatch situation.

Let's see if I can sum up what he said in layman's terms: use woof as the release overarching 'brand' and then simply rebuild with an updated woof to keep the release current, making whatever new pup is built the latest version of woof, kind of like Ubuntu-focal, Ubuntu-bionic... Woof-jammy, Woof-S15, etc

[amethyst]

Does S15 pup have a topic?

Not yet - it's basically identical to ScPup just using Slackware-15.0 instead of Slackware-Current components.

So why don't you just put forward ScPup64 instead? That has at least been tried and tested a bit, I suppose.

[wanderer]

SC is a rolling release and thus unstable

[dimkr]

An official Puppy based on a rolling distro is not a great idea IMO, especially if it relies on prebuilt packages. If Slackware Current drops GTK+ 2 tomorrow or replaces a library with an incompatible one (say, the OpenSSL 1.1.1x to OpenSSL 3.0.x upgrade that broke so many things in other distros), ScPup is either broken for some time, or dead.

[amethyst]

SC is a rolling release and thus unstable

Okay so let us then just roll along to something else.

[amethyst]

An official Puppy based on a rolling distro is not a great idea IMO, especially if it relies on prebuilt packages. If Slackware Current drops GTK+ 2 tomorrow or replaces a library with an incompatible one (say, the OpenSSL 1.1.1x to OpenSSL 3.0.x upgrade that broke so many things in other distros), ScPup is either broken for some time, or dead.

A few of us like your proposals as put up earlier. Are you going to provide that Puppy for us and distrowatch? I would try it myself. peebee already said he's not looking at ubuntu/debian based 64-bit Puppy if I read it correctly.

[dimkr]

I can do some of that work. I already have all the the building blocks and the infrastructure. However, if the only one who actively contributes to woof-CE and adopts at least one of its known-to-work build configuration (in my case, dpup bullseye and bookworm) is me, then I'm out: the result would be the same as Vanilla Dpup, but branded as an "official" Puppy and burdened by the extra work, expectations and noise I'm trying to avoid.

[amethyst]

I can do some of that work. I already have all the the building blocks and the infrastructure. However, if the only one who actively contributes to woof-CE and adopts at least one of its known-to-work build configuration (in my case, dpup bullseye and bookworm) is me, then I'm out: the result would be the same as Vanilla Dpup, but branded as an "official" Puppy and burdened by the extra work, expectations and noise I'm trying to avoid.

Who else has the expertise? I'm sure some would like to help but can't really due to lack of knowledge, expertise, etc.

[jamesbond]

<snip> ... but it may not fit into the time constraints of the distrowatch situation.

And here is the thing I don't understand: what's the rush?
What's the worst that can happen if we don't do it "in time"?
I think the worst thing is that we will be marked as "dormant" or "inactive", which doesn't sound too bad to me.
We can re-activate it again when we do have a "real" release instead of forcing a "farce" one.

Rather than letting the time pressure us to release rushly-released, half-baked, untested Puppy, which could potentially be full of bugs ad scare new users away the first time they try it; I'd suggest that we spend as much time that is necessary to build a high quality release that the developer(s) would stand behind, one that everyone here can be proud of. We will update Distrowatch when we're ready to update.

We can still continue the discussion here on which flavours of Puppy we want to promote as flagship, who would be doing it, etc etc etc but really, we __don't__ want to have a lemon being featured as our "flagship" on Distrowatch. That would be in my opinion __worse__ than no release at all. If there is no release, at least people can still reminisce and keep fond memories of their favourite distro.

PS: My comment is addressed to everyone not only to geo_c.

[peebee]

S15Pup RC Discussion thread

S15Pup64-22.11-RC.iso has been uploaded

Can anyone ( @zigbert ? ) help with the pMusic icon oddity?

[dimkr]

dimkr did not offer his vanilladpup. Disqualified. (he did say it is ok to modify and change the name but he will have nothing to do with it?)

I'll clarify. What I mean is, I don't mind it if somebody builds a Debian-based Puppy with woof-CE and uses the default configuration included in woof-CE. Without any modification, the result would be identical to Vanilla Dpup. I even don't mind if that somebody proposes some changes to this build configuration and even woof-CE's core, to achieve his or her vision of a Puppy worthy of the "official" designation, based on Vanilla Dpup but with additions and changes. I'm only asking, out of all the possible names in the world, don't call this creation "Vanilla Dpup" and go for something else instead, to avoid confusion with my (intentionally) barebones and boring Puppy builds.

[wanderer]

hi jamesbond

your concern makes sense

now that we have the twin candidates of S15 pup 32 and 64

cant we just test them until we feel they are ready

dogcat said we have 66 days

wanderer

[wanderer]

i am using S15 pup 32 full time

so ill report any issues i see

none yet

wanderer

[mikewalsh]

Mmm...

Well, as always, James is the voice of reason. And I tend to agree. What IS the rush?

Seems to me that certain - admittedly well-intentioned - individuals are whipping up a "rush-tear-hurry" atmosphere in response to a completely artificial & pointless "deadline". So what if we go "dormant" again? BIG DEAL. From what I understand, we only came out of hibernation a matter of days ago anyway, so it's not exactly a life & death situation, is it?

If the community wants to put its best foot forward, and show the rest of the wider Linux community just what we really ARE capable of, for Chrissake's let's take our time and do things properly.

We're only a small community. We have only a few 'devs', and they mostly have their hands full with their own projects anyway. And let's not lose sight of the biggest elephant in the room.....with the exception of a very small percentage of individuals, the entire Linux community does what it does in its spare time as a hobby.....for the love of it.....and most importantly, because they WANT to. Not because of any contractual obligations that say they MUST put in 'X' number of hours of work a day because they're receiving pecuniary remuneration in exchange.

Once you start putting "MUST" and "GOT TO" and "HAVE TO" into the equation, any enjoyment in the creative process goes straight out the window. And the whole thing deflates & falls flat, VERY quickly.

Are we really going to create our very best under those circumstances? Those that work best under pressure are few and far between; you only have to look at the "pressure-cooker" atmosphere Redmond instills to see what that begets..!

Myself, I prefer to take my time and get things right; once I start working to deadlines, my creative juices dry-up and everything falls apart. I suspect more folks fall into that category than would care to admit it.

I don't expect many here to agree with me, though. Ah, hell; do as you will.....

Mike.