dimkr wrote: ↑Wed Sep 13, 2023 5:31 amstevie pup wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 10:34 pmSorry I thought VanillaDPup already was a mainline Pup?
How do you define a "mainline Pup"?
Simply because VanillaDPup is in the "mainline" section of the forum, rather than "derivatives" or "projects" or anywhere else, no other reason. So that's down to whoever decided to put it there.
Totally agree Wiak.
This also describes the election process for the releases listed in puppylinux.com and the downloads table in the forum (can't find it for some reason) 
mikewalsh wrote: ↑Tue Sep 12, 2023 4:36 pm@bigpup :-
Uh-huh. Okay. What I take away from this is you think getting bugs sorted & issues fixed as soon as is practical is of utmost importance.....and should take precedence over all other aspects, yes?
Essentially, like every other distro out there. Would I be right in making this assumption?
In other words, we have one, "official" Puppy that takes precedence, and should be something that the whole community can "get behind". Something like that?
Hasn't this idea been mooted before.....on multiple occasions? You're not the only one who appears to think that turning Puppy over to the community was a backwards step....
Mike.
Go try and release a buggy operating system and see how much it gets used.
Yes fixing bugs is important!
That is why you should identify a new release OS as alpha, beta, Release candidate, stable release!
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=3683
In other words, we have one, "official" Puppy that takes precedence, and should be something that the whole community can "get behind". Something like that?
YES!
But in no way does that stop any other development or ideas to try!
It does make sure that the next new Puppy Linux, to be offered to the world, will be the best featured and well developed.
You're not the only one who appears to think that turning Puppy over to the community was a backwards step....
I think turning it over to the community was the best idea! 
But that was still done with one person having some control of Puppy Linux.
That was suppose to be 01micko, but he now is no longer involved. Unless in Woof-CE development.
As I understand it the latest version of official Puppy Linux is S15Pup.
It was selected so something new could be posted on Distrowatch and keep Puppy Linux listed as an active Linux OS. They were going to drop Puppy Linux from Distrowatch.
Yes, the person that made that choice and got it listed on Distrowatch, did function as an overall person to keep an eye on the ball, and keep Puppy out there for others to see.
But who that is or could be?????
That is kind of who rockedge is.
Where do you think Puppy Linux would be, if not for what rockedge allows on this forum?
This forum is Puppy Linux.
The things you do not tell us, are usually the clue to fixing the problem.
When I was a kid, I wanted to be older.
This is not what I expected 
But,
1. The screenshot in puppylinux.com shows FossaPup 9.5, and that's the first download option - maybe this is why we have a steady stream of new users who ask questions about it.
2. Why offer anything except the latest official release on the official homepage of Puppy? If the latest release is the best bet for new users while all others are unmaintained for years, that's what they should be offered. If not, let's fix the problems with this new official version, create a bugfix release and start recommending it instead of old versions.
3. I have a gut feeling that S15Pup is not super popular, and users prefer to stick with older "official" releases because they're not using Slackware packages. A Slackware-based Puppy is a tough sell: new Linux users are more familiar with the name "Ubuntu", the Slackware repos are relatively small, Slackware packages are big and take lots of save file space (because development files are not moved to a separate -dev package) and an Ubuntu or Debian based Puppy is much more likely to be compatible with a popular application: for example, Chrome, Steam, VS Code and Zoom are available as .deb packages. This new official release is a big step backwards or many users, and I don't see it becoming as popular as its predecessors. Bookworm Pup64 sounds like a much better candidate, IMO: it includes a proper package manager, integrates PipeWire (so audio "just works" without having to mess with apulse), has a huge kernel with many drivers and a huge pile of firmware, and it's much newer.
Not only should the latest "official" version be first and foremost on the downloads page. but should occupy a prominent and dedicated forum listing on the Board Index main page under the General section and not a sublisting under the various Distributions section of this forum.
The varieties of offerings was confusing ten years ago and still is to the newcomer. Although the description "Puppy Linux is a collection of multiple Linux distributions" helps clarify much of what Puppy is about for the users who like choices, For the users that appreciate the KISS princple, there ought to be a primary choice.
In addition, the choice of upstream package repos for future "officals" should not change unless that upstream project breaks. This is a spec that needs to be settled in order to offer consistency to that portion of the community who wants something that works with a minimal of learning.
S15Pup was a stopgap to satisfy Distrowatch....
I would be delighted if BookwormPup was to replace it, although it would be nice to have both 32 & 64 bit versions.
The website is hosted on Github and can be changed as required.
Builder of LxPups, SPups, UPup32s, VoidPups; LXDE, LXQt, Xfce addons; Chromium, Firefox etc. sfs; & Kernels
If you believe that's the right direction for Puppy, as the primary developer of 32 bit stuff, why don't you invest your time in that? A "pure" Debian Puppy should be easier to maintain (faster build, more stable, more time between releases), lighter and more compatible with old hardware (because packages are older) and more Debian-compatible, compared to a hybrid Debian-Ubuntu thing. Most of the actively maintained Puppy releases bring nothing new to the table (except newer package versions, not always a blessing for old computers) and they're not very different from each other, but a 32 bit variant of Bookworm Pup would be a huge improvement.
If suddenly fate throws you and me into Salem... then we will be able to make a good business on predictions 
In addition, it is better to use not our guts, but chickens and ducks, as in the old days.
Sooner or later, customers will realize that we use the usual logic 
...
But there is a backup plan... we go to Brighton Beach and continue there. True, in this case we will most likely have to change into female fortune-tellers, but what can we do if such is the demand
Fossapup OS, Ryzen 5 3600 CPU, 64 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4 GB, Sound Blaster Audigy Rx with amplifier + Yamaha speakers for loud sound, USB Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1 Pro V3 + headphones for quiet sound.
As much as I like s15pup, I agree it was a necessary stopgap, & debian derivatives are more flexible & popular. That makes Bookworm & Vanilla Dpup good candidates. Puppy's point-of difference was always 'small, but very functional'. I know talk is cheap, but I'm not capable of such a project, other than hacking down someone else's work, which does not produce a long-term result. Although I'm not usually huge on social licence, I believe we need to to consider the 3rd world, & offer an up-to-date, usable, extensible CD-sized Puppy (under 700mb - Jammypup64 was 571mb). No-one else will & we, like so many other distros, run the risk of merely mirroring win/apple/google.
LATER: I recompressed BookwormPup64's sfs's with medium compression (-b 512K -comp xz -Xdict-size 50%) - now 674mb.
- I also set /root permissions to 700 & added updatesfsb, which I used to compress sfs's, to /usr/local/bin.
Human factor:
Everything has a certain ergonomic limit, right?
The increase in what you call mobile application code lines means larger sized WhatsApp, Discord, Chrome, Instagram, etc. means
Increasing the size of these applications means larger power supply, namely the battery, as they require more space.
Nowadays, people already carry a small battery in the back pocket of their trousers, and on top of that, they have started to make the batteries non-removable.
It seems that the situation will change after a while, as the battery size will not reach the size of the backpack.
My predictions:
* What I said is not about the foldable and compact screens of mobile devices, the issue is electricity, that is, the power supply/battery.
* Will virtual glasses that consume less power become widespread? It may be for gaming, but it does not replace a mobile phone in daily life, it seems like it would get in the way.
* Will people who use mobile applications get used to wristwatches that consume less power? If it didn't happen years ago, it won't happen now either.
The viewing angle also has an ergonomics, the screen size is not enough for people.
I think mobile phones need to be simplified, otherwise they will always have a battery problem.
* phone-only feature
* a good camera.
* and it is enough for this phone to be synchronized with the PC/Laptop
For those who have a habit of using social media or have to use it for their job
It helps them transition from mobile to desktop environment.
Most mobile apps seem to have Snap and Flaptpak versions,
Snap and Flatpak are the best solutions that will make maintenance more comfortable for those who are in the technical part of this business.
So, friends, mobility will inevitably evolve towards the pc/laptop side.
Continue to trust Puppy Linux
I wrote these because I was thinking about technical people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, a simple user like me cannot tamper with Firefox that much if Mozilla does not allow it.
''Free software is a matter of liberty, not price. Think of “free” as in “free speech”, not as in “free beer”.
Free software is a matter of the users' freedom to run, copy, distribute, study, change and improve the software''
FSF.ORG
If there are people like me who still use push-button phones and like to use Linux, come here and become a member of the forum, so that the community can expand
Regards
Acer Aspire One AO751h Netbook Intel Atom CPU Z520 1.33 GHz:1-1 core 2 GB+2 GB Swap SSD. Sony 5200 mAh: BullseyePup 9.1.0 Lite on Kingston SSD Frugal
Acer Aspire 3 A315-58-34HD 8 GB DDR4 4.10 GHz Intel Core i3-1115G4 CPU 2-4 128 GB SSD: BookwormPup64
Several of the last few posts and this topic in general are showing that Puppy does need a single person to drive the boat.
Not have total control, but some control of what is being done.
More than anything, what will the Puppy Linux the world is offered.
Needs to consider, listen to, question, all input from others, about anything with Puppy Linux.
But at the end of the day, someone is needed to make final choice(s).
Controls what is placed on puppylinux.com
Makes final decision on what will be the next official Puppy version.
Getting what needs to be kept into the official Puppy repository at http://distro.ibiblio.org/puppylinux/
In fact several people need to have ability to get stuff placed in it.
Anyone producing Puppy Linux OS versions, for sure, need to be able to use ibiblio.org Puppy repository.
There are a few people that are very good at making program packages for Puppy Linux and are constantly offering ones to use.
There stuff is all over the Internet in different locations that allow storing stuff.
They should have the ability to use ibiblio.org Puppy repository.
A secure, safe ,and always going to be there, free place to use. (maybe they just need to register and get access ability from ibiblio 
(there are some download links to software, that was stored in locations out in the Internet, that are no good, and that software is now lost.
that will never happen with ibiblio.org Puppy repository.
Exactly what happens on this forum.
At the end of the day, rockedge has the final control of the forum.
All others, providing input, suggestions, issues, problems, etc...., help him to make the hopefully best choices.
Forum moderators are the cleanup crew and you would be surprised, what under the hood, they have to do, to keep this forum as good as it is.
The things you do not tell us, are usually the clue to fixing the problem.
When I was a kid, I wanted to be older.
This is not what I expected
@bigpup There's only one person who can upload stuff to ibiblio and has commit access to woof-CE and maintains puppylinux.com and probably single-handedly maintains the vast majority of actively-maintained Puppy releases [...], and that's @peebee.
IMO the problem is not lack of authority or anything of that kind. I agree with what you said earlier, and the main problem I see is lack of focus: if we have very few developers, development should focus on the kind of Puppy releases users seem to prefer (Ubuntu or Debian based ones, I guess) and the things people love about Puppy (like saving ROX-Filer from extinction, or making use cases described in https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?p=98596 easier). Somehow, the focus in Puppy development has shifted from quality (stable, fast, small, useful ...) to quantity (many releases with similar issues, similar applications and similar limitations), and that's how we ended up where we are.
and @01micko and only he can grant rights to others.....
Builder of LxPups, SPups, UPup32s, VoidPups; LXDE, LXQt, Xfce addons; Chromium, Firefox etc. sfs; & Kernels
I can see your point but for just one person in charge, wouldn't that be a mammoth task, and a huge responsibility? Who would want to take all that on? I would guess that forum mods have their hands full sometimes.
And for what it's worth, if I were to be given some vintage laptop and suddenly found myself in need of a 32bit OS my immediate choice these days would be VanillaDPup. The alternative I'm afraid would be antiX Linux (sorry about that). 
IMO the focus should be reducing the number of projects and increasing the number of developers that work together in one way or another.
For example, I think @radky made the right choice when he decided to use Vanilla Dpup's kernel instead of rolling his own, because the fix (https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... 6409bd4797) for the issue reported by @playdayz will reach Bookworm Pup64. Any Puppy release that uses some other kernel will need to be fixed independently. This is a big waste of effort and a source of confusion for users, who need to choose between Puppy a with problem x or Puppy b with problem y instead of having one release that drinks all bug fixes directly from woof-CE and things "just work".
When one of us decides to do their own thing (https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... 1325790631) we're re-introducing an issue already fixed elsewhere (https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... afb4903e82), and another copy that needs to be fixed if an issue is reported in the future.
This also happens in the other direction: https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/woof-CE/pull/3867 is another good example. Users who need IME (like Japanese Puppy fans; @thinkpadfreak reported this) couldn't move on from Fossapup 9.5 because IME didn't work in any recent Puppy until a manual, undocumented change in Fossapup 9.5 was upstreamed into woof-CE and eventually made its way to new Puppy releases.
So where is he?
I never see him on this forum.
Last post i read by him was this:
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=7835
It seems to indicate he is not going to be that involved anymore.
This forum is where development and OS releases are being done.
Is the big issue people not using the latest Woof-CE to build with?
The things you do not tell us, are usually the clue to fixing the problem.
When I was a kid, I wanted to be older.
This is not what I expected
The issue I see is 3 issues:
1) People not using latest woof-CE, so some Puppy releases lag behind and have bugs already fixed in other releases
1.1) People using woof-CE but not adopting new features: for example, many Puppy releases are still built with some ancient ROX-Filer .pet package that contains known issues, instead of using woof-CE's ability to build ROX-Filer from source with the latest Puppy patches
2) People using some version of woof-CE, modifying it locally and never contributing back the changes, so one Puppy release has a unique feature or unique bug fix others don't have ... then, the Puppy version described as its "successor" is a step backwards because it was built without that modification
3) Too many people trying to build too many Puppy releases, so no release gets tested properly, the various releases are similar to each other (because a solo developer doesn't have the time to develop big features) and big problems that require collaboration (things like reviving PPM, porting ROX-Filer away from GTK+ 2 or cleaning up 20 years of legacy cruft in Puppy) don't get any attention
dimkr wrote: ↑Thu Sep 14, 2023 1:55 pm2) People using some version of woof-CE, modifying it locally and never contributing back the changes, so one Puppy release has a unique feature or unique bug fix others don't have ... then, the Puppy version described as its "successor" is a step backwards because it was built without that modification
It's a classic Then I can't remember what and where I did. Next time, I sometimes have to deal with the problem anew and in a different way.
Fossapup OS, Ryzen 5 3600 CPU, 64 GB RAM, GeForce GTX 1050 Ti 4 GB, Sound Blaster Audigy Rx with amplifier + Yamaha speakers for loud sound, USB Sound Blaster X-Fi Surround 5.1 Pro V3 + headphones for quiet sound.
@01micko is going to have to hand over the GitHub rights. Simple as that. Crazy to have someone who's not involved and not intending to get more involved and is mostly absent and be the one who is making the code review and is the one with woof-CE commit merging control and "ownership" of the GitHub account containing woof-CE.
It has nothing to do with the "Do-acracy" concept but is based on reality. It is like riding off into the sunset and taking the house keys and the Deed along.
Probably a good time to remind people that the rent for the forum space has been increased
For sure..... 4 me => 
Learning EASY OS https://easyos.org/
DevuanPup XFCE_FUSILLI https://devuanpup.wordpress.com/
f96ce XFCE_FUSILLI https://puppyxfcefusilli.wordpress.com/
YouTube HOW_TO... https://bit.ly/f96ce_xfce_fusilli_HOWTO
He already did, we have 7 people with admin rights on the woof-CE repo and the website repo. It's not lack of permissions that's inhibiting collaboration and innovation.
@dimkr :-
Well, yes; I agree. What's needed is "boots on the ground".
Yes, it probably would make far more sense for everybody that releases distros - whether built using Woof-CE, or re-masters, or however they're done - to pool their assets and expertise, and "pull together" for the common good of the community IF they/we want Puppy to last as a viable distro into the future.
However, I will say this:- It's no good making some kind of blanket "rule" - as @bigpup seems to be suggesting:-
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic. ... 668#p98668
.....i.e., "You know something about coding; you WILL get involved with working on Puppy". Yes, I - for instance - know something about coding now (after 10 years with Puppy), but ONLY insofar as my own projects & interests go. It's like so many people at work; very few of us are lucky enough to get that 'dream job' that we love doing. For most, it's merely a necessity to keep the wolves at bay; you do the work because it's a condition of getting that weekly/monthly wage, but you don't want to be there; you'd really rather be somewhere else. That being the case, you do the work to a just good enough standard to 'pass muster'.....but you don't put your heart & soul into it, or do it to the best of your ability.
For Puppy to remain viable, it HAS to be of a good enough standard to attract people.....and it needs to be easy enough to use that people aren't put off at the first hurdle. And that requires developers / coders who KNOW what they're doing, and have the interest to make the best job they possibly can. It's pointless 'drafting' people in just to "make up the numbers"; those individuals, ideally, need to be committed to what they're doing.
.....and that doesn't describe me, I'm sorry to say. Perhaps it's a "selfish" attitude to some, but just because I know a little bit of coding - not very much, just enough to allow me to do what I want to do - it's no use telling me that I "must" work on Puppy. I've always been more interested in what runs on top of the OS.....not the OS itself.
I'm sorry if that attitude annoys some of you. But I know that my coding isn't of a good enough standard, nor am I interested enough to make the best job I possibly can for the community as a whole.
So; I do what I do......and what I know I'm best at.
(*shrug...*)
Mike. 
As radky, dimkr, peebee & others think BookwormPup64 is a good candidate, it is an up-to-date woof-ce pup, AND it is popular (my CD size version had 13 downloads in the first 4 hours), just maybe that is where we should focus. It has a lot going for it.
mikewalsh,
I guess what I wrote and think all should understand, is not what everyone understands.
https://forum.puppylinux.com/viewtopic.php?t=9556
That topic is about what is needed and asking for help anyway you can.
As simple as that!
But it does ask you to do something!
It does state what is ALWAYS needed.
What are issues in Puppy Linux to keep it going.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe it is time to have a good discussion on giving full support to Woof-CE build system.
It sure could use others helping.
People come and go, so it is not in stone, who works on Woof-CE.
I just do not understand why there seems to be an underlying resistance to using or offering improvements to it!
Something as simple as this to update Woof-CE:
peebee wrote: ↑Fri Sep 15, 2023 10:58 amUploaded to Woof-CE:
https://github.com/puppylinux-woof-CE/w ... pup-41.pet
This is the latest version of Frugalpup Installer, so when building with Woof-CE, you will have it to use in the build.
I see stuff on this forum that is being built using some other build script.
But they are not Puppy Linux operating systems. More Puppy like.
They do not seem to be open ended build systems, like Woof-CE is trying to be.
If these other build scripts are so good, compared to building with Woof-CE.
Maybe the people that produce these other build scripts, could help with improving Woof-CE.
The things you do not tell us, are usually the clue to fixing the problem.
When I was a kid, I wanted to be older.
This is not what I expected
mikewalsh wrote:.....and that doesn't describe me, I'm sorry to say. Perhaps it's a "selfish" attitude to some, but just because I know a little bit of coding - not very much, just enough to allow me to do what I want to do - it's no use telling me that I "must" work on Puppy. I've always been more interested in what runs on top of the OS.....not the OS itself.
I'm sorry if that attitude annoys some of you. But I know that my coding isn't of a good enough standard, nor am I interested enough to make the best job I possibly can for the community as a whole.
You said that many times, such as "But I know that my coding isn't of a good enough standard" we know that now !
IMO what you can NOT is NOT important, everyone has it's talents, but also limitations, or e.g. specializations etc.. for example me, I do some coding but if I compare my abilities with some "coding gurus" .... also e.g. my knowledge about hardware is very limited and so on ...
So... Don't put yourself down and do what you can ! Testing stuff is important too , btw.
EDIT: Now you do it again, in next post saying: 'My coding is piss-poor quality' Stop it ! It's annoying and doesn't contribute anything.
@bigpup :-
Ah, you're OK. Maybe I read something, and something strange in my head translates it differently to how everybody else sees it! I don't know.
All I was saying, really, is that although I may have produced a fair amount of stuff for the community over the years, doesn't mean that my understanding of code is good enough for the underlying operating system itself. My coding is piss-poor quality, mate; I have enough trouble making my own stuff function the way it's supposed to, never mind trying to help improve stuff that everyone else is going to rely on to work properly....
You look at any of my scripting, it's basically simple file-manipulation and basic conditional stuff. It's nowhere near what's needed for the OS itself. I'd be embarrassed to submit anything for consideration in the august company of our devs!
Mike.
@fredx181 :-
Hi, Fred. Heh. Okay, so perhaps I have produced the odd item that's proved useful to others over the years. I play at this stuff, mate; it's never been owt more than a passing hobby to me. And as the years pass, I get less & less time to devote to it.
I like the community. I like the atmosphere (even the squabbles!). You're a great bunch, the lot of you. I just wish I had the skills (and the time!) to contribute more than I do, that's all....
(*sigh*)
As for 'testing' stuff, well.... Y'know, I'm probably the world's worst 'tester'. I find running an OS in stock trim to be incredibly boring. I can't wait to try stuff out, start adding things and customizing the hell out of it! Which is NOT to say that I don't appreciate the huge amounts of effort that go into producing these wee masterpieces; I do!!
Ah, hell; I know I'm an oddball, mate. Still, I do what I can.......
-----------------------------
As an aside, I'm frankly amazed how far my 'reputation' seems to have spread. I joined Linux.org a little over a year ago. Many of the regulars knew me over there.
I joined the Slax Forums a couple of years back. Seems I'm well-known over there, too.
I've just started playing around with Porteus. Joined their community a few days ago. Everybody there seems to know me, an' all! Huh?? 
And it doesn't appear it's a bad reputation, either. I just get embarrassed, me.....
Mike. 
A very interesting discussion as I have been following. Many good points are raised.
I cant tell if this thread is
A discussion aimed at creating a formidable pathway
A discussion on identifying the current problematic direction in hopes of bringing all together into a common site-wide theme
A discussion that intends to identifying which of the WoofCEs becomes the directional for future PUP and Linux technologies
A discussion on organizational structure to mitigate focused understanding of PUP mainline distro(s)
Thus, as much of GOOD INFO and UNDERSTANDING that is occurring as the hood is lifted on this forum thread, it is of interest, to me, in how this can come together. In my 80 approx years on this planet there is some human 'shortcomings' that is built-in such that it makes it questionable in how to bring all of the element of this thread together where an agreement resolves into a directional future without fallout. There are so many personalities, views, and traits that exist such that a "common" seems out of reach.
This DOES NOT MEAN we shouldn't try to envision...not for a perfect world...but for a better approach to a common world where MOST will agree (BEWARE of the stone thrower that exist...even here). Thus this thread's theme can be thought of as this being an effort to insure that this forum or "PUPPY LINUX" is sustainable and attractive to new talent(s) by making it simpler/easier to arrive at an understanding of its offerings and its invitations.
Example: Some developers 'disregard' forum helpers who do not code, while others see a diversification of talents as those who are to be 'regarded'. This is just one of many I can express as having seen in this forum.
So here is an idea that I think this thread's followers can gather in consensus.
This forum is spear-headed by @rockedge layout that makes accomodations of the various means of provided usable distros for Puppyland Public consumption; namely IMHO, organized by build types:
WoofCE distros
WoofQ distros
DOGs distros
KL's distros
Remasters distros
and adventurers who find this community a place to harbor their work and garner some attention
with each making some attempts to present a similar desktop experience to ease user use/transition.
Each area may have some shortcoming as all human approaches do, but @rockedge's concept presents structure.
Would it be prudent for EACH area's developers to gather and select ways of presenting what they feel as "Official" while each area providing a list of what is present in the area as ranked by some ranking those developers find as other non-official works that are worth noting.
Further, through some process, each area would present documentation supporting the works that exist within each area.
Now, personally, I DONT SUBSCRIBE TO THIS way of isolating developers because one group may not suggest important contributions to other areas. As such some areas will fight to stay behind in technological growth: this is NORMAL and expected human behavior.
(Behavior example: I worked in a headquarters assignment doing capacity planning where we routinely evaluated performance impact in planned system changes. As a result of the finding of this 4 decades ago, I continue to marvel at the number or people who still swear by 32bit; even on 64bit architecture. They had NO/little understanding of hardware and transistor gates and maybe dont understand all of the reasons why most every Linux & OS distributions has moved on to 64bit.) So, there is still a community who will find purpose in wanting to keep 32bit alive even though every new desktop over the past 2 decades are 64bit. I have seen the capacity and the performance numbers and understand what is there in hardware. Thus I understand where Oracle/Intel/IBM/Apple/Google/Tesla/TI/Motorola are going and why. Everyone does not have the same background and thus cannot see the same picture for hardware accuracy and understanding.)
We can change or add publications and web-presence which announces what could be considered as the "Official" of each of those area. And each team(s) can work such that they have guides and listing of their area's distros with each area's listings being updated quarterly/semi-annually/as-needed.
This, then, does NOT detract from much of the good design, IMHO, that @rockedge has already produced. It maintains a good design bringing some mere tweaks of minor enhancement to the current. This is not revolutionary, rather, its small/tiny additions.
I know this idea is flawed as I recognize I am flawed. But, its one manner of putting a stake in the ground for this thread to rallye into a focused movement forward.
Just another view and idea...
