Puppy's DotPup package installer vs. Add'l Software forum

[GuestToo]

Maybe we should ask Barry to remove the DPDL from Puppys menue.

that might be too drastic a "solution"
and maybe i'm the only one who finds this a problem

i don't really want to suggest a solution like that anyway ... it makes me feel petty and petulant

i think making a Windows-installer-programs database/downloader would be very difficult ... there are many thousands of installer-programs and newer versions of installer-programs on hundreds or thousands of web pages (there are over 1500 attachments to the Puppy forum already ... many of the attachments are dotpup files) ... it would probably be easier to make a program that would download and install some of the programs that are available on web pages, but i think trying to handle each and every installer-program and version changes would be quite difficult ... i think any of these installer-programs would be easily accessible directly from the appropriate webpage using, for example, Firefox (if you can find the web page to download the file from, of course)

pupget is more like apt-get or an rpm repository ... an organized package repository all in one place ... i envisaged dotpups as more like Windows installer files, not necessarily limited to one repository ... it seems to me, if you put dotpup packages in one repository, and have a pupget-like interface for it, then you might as well just use pupget packages

[deshlab]

(just deleted a lengthy post as the discussion has advanced so much. My main point was that sticky index, wiki pages and DPDL should be about helping users.
Forum is up-to-date but too chaotic, wiki pages are organized and categorized but potentially outdated and hard to maintain with the increasing number of dotpups, DPDL is the easiest access but suffers from the same problems.
So we have three somewhat user-unfriendly methods of dotpup distribution instead of any stable one...)

MU's dotpup.de project sounds very promising - discussing changes of the dotpup wiki pages may therefor be unnecessary. I'd still like to help with the forum index thread. It could be organized to cooperate with te dotpup.de structure to make it easy to find discussions about the software available there. I think a forum thread about a software is more useful than the short info files of the dsl index.

If the DPDL was removed from the menu, maybe a small tool could be placed at it's position that points to the forum/wiki. What I like most about the DPDL is it's placement just where one would look for it.

[MU]

i don't really want to suggest a solution like that anyway ... it makes me feel petty and petulant

No need to feel like that.
Remember, the idea of the downloader basically was not to build something for beginners.
I made it, to help me getting a better overview over the wiki.
Then I posted it, in case someone could have a need for that.
The first versions didn't show any information about the dotpups, it was just intended for people who already kenw that downloading something like "nedit.pup" would download a Texteditor.

As some people liked this concept, but were missing information, I started adding the routines that allow to visitit Links added to the Dotpup.
So that you can read the Forum-message (in Mozilla) of a dotpup before installing it.
However, as the Wiki is not intended to force people adding a link to a forum-message, this is not very reliable.
An UploadForm in a pure "repository" might encourage people writing some words.

So the concept basically was something for experienced users, later enhanced slightly to make it a little bit more comfortable.

I think adding it to Puppys menu would require to build such a tool completely from new, with the main-purpose of helping beginners - and yes,in that case a PupGet-orientated concept might be better.
It is just a question of if I/someone else will be able to do it.
This Dotpup-approach seemed to be a thing easy to understand and to use.
I had problems understanding the alien-package thing.

Now, that I am more used to puppy, I might be able to use PupGet instead as a base for a downloader.
But i can't promise that, I will have to look at that first more detailed.

Greets,Mark

[deshlab]

concerning pupget: it is a gui, but far from being as synaptic-like as DPDL since it has no categories but lists the tools alphabetically. It has one spreadsheet editor at the beginning and another in the middle of the list. Furthermore it contains neither detailed descriptions nor download sizes (i think it gives these before you start the actual download?).
As a user I actually feel much more comfortable with DPDL and hesitate to use Pupget because I'd have to google for the software to find out more and then I still don't know if it was customized for puppy in anyway.

[MU]

Deshlab, yes, it might be nice to "merge" the DPDL-Gui with Pupget internal system I think.
This was never intended, as in the beginning it was just a tool to help me getting a quick overview over the wiki.

Merging these would be a complete rewrite.
As I just described, i can't promise at all, if I will be able to do that, or if I stay with a dotpup-based system, using a structured repository built especially for this purpose.

Mark

[deshlab]

i envisaged dotpups as more like Windows installer files, not necessarily limited to one repository ... it seems to me, if you put dotpup packages in one repository, and have a pupget-like interface for it, then you might as well just use pupget packages

I wanted to mention that earlier: your point of view is that of a developer and somewhat far from what I as a user feel about it.
The way dotpups work is great and that people with little understanding of programming and compiling can create them is the best thing about it. But since there is no use for dotpups outside of puppy all dotpups can be found inside of the puppyverse that consists of the forum, the wiki and some small external pages which also post their files in the forum. ('Can be found' means: easy for long time puppyist and difficult for new pupsters that just want to replace some windows programs.)

This is the main difference to the world of windows installers and this is why a repository for the growing number of dotpups should be the next step in my opinion. It would still be far away from being official like the pupget packages and would have to come with a warning about potential dangers but as the number of forum pages and the length of the two wiki pages rise it will be the most convenient solution.

To put it in a nutshell (<- my old english teacher would be oh so proud), a categorized repository plus the forum threads could make the wiki pages (and the DPDL) obsolete - as MU stated: they were used because it was the easiest way at that time and the DPDL was created because they were beginning to get less useful.

[MU]

for example, suppose i decided that my dotpup page was getting too big, and i split it up, maybe having a Graphics page and a Multimedia page, etc etc ... i can do that anytime, but if i do that, it will immediately break the DPDL (probably, the DPDL should fetch a list of urls to parse, then it would be easier to deal with changes of the web pages) ... the point is, if i make any changes, it will break all the older versions of the DPDL on older versions of Puppy, and the DPDL will have to be rewritten, and there is only one person supporting it at the moment

Also correct.
This is simply, as the DPDL was an approach of using existing solutions.
An enhanced version would need to be based on a standard - not on a wiki.
For the future, it shall use a repository based on a very simple php-script without the need of mysql.

This can be used on any webspace supporting PHP.
Then DPDL gets a configuration-dialog, where you may enter other repositories.

Such a repository may be any homepage that uses the php-script.
It may just offer 1 or 2 dotpups - or 100 - so "repository" does not automatically mean "huge".

I also might add a function to add such a repository to a online-list at dotpups.de and 2 or 3 other websites (in case there would be problems with dotpups.de).

Then the DPDL would look up if there is a new entry, and list those packages, too.

Mark

[puppian]

if the DPDL were just another program anyone could download and install and use if they liked, then it wouldn't be evil at all ... it would just be another program, an alternative way of downloading and installing dotpup packages ... but the way it is now, many Puppy users think it's the official and only way to install dotpup packages

True
Btw it seems that I'm also resposible for the disadvantages of DPDL...I had suggested MU to write a GUI to parse the two wiki pages...
Fyi, we now have something here. With the appropriate mods installed it can show sub-categories too, and may allow member's submission (one good thing for user's submission is that less effort is needed to maintained the list)

Edit for MU: the concept of DPDL has advantages of course

[MU]

puppian, I still like the concept of DPDL.

I can understand G2s point of view, that Dotpups were not intended to be installed with an external tool.
On the other hand I really like tools like Synaptic.
For Windows-users, such a tool might be new, and yes, they are not used to it.
But for Linux-users it can be very comfortable - if it is done correct.
I really was missing that in Puppy.
The current implementation simply has some disadvantages, as it was "learning by doing".
But don't forget, that it took years, until Debian had synaptic.
Perfect software is not created in some weeks
I think the current discussion may help in developing a better solution.

Greets, Mark

[Flash]

... i think some of the links to the forum may be broken if a post is moved ...

I've probably moved more posts around in the forum than all the other moderators put together, so if you do find that a URL to a forum post no longer works please let me know. When I started moving posts my testing indicated that the original URL to a post still works no matter where the post is moved in the forum.

[Pizzasgood]

I wanted to mention that earlier: your point of view is that of a developer and somewhat far from what I as a user feel about it.
The way dotpups work is great and that people with little understanding of programming and compiling can create them is the best thing about it. But since there is no use for dotpups outside of puppy all dotpups can be found inside of the puppyverse that consists of the forum, the wiki and some small external pages which also post their files in the forum. ('Can be found' means: easy for long time puppyist and difficult for new pupsters that just want to replace some windows programs.)

Windows programs are of no use outside Windows (unless you use emulatores, but that's not the point and can work in reverse anyways). Is there a central repository for Windows software? Nope. You scour the web to find what you want.

As for Puppy stuff, that could actually work on other linux distros. And as far as the Puppy-verse goes, it is relatively small now, but once Puppy starts catching on, it's going to explode. Then it will be pointless to consider the Puppyverse because there will be random sites all over the web, just like Windows and bigger Linux distros.

That said, I do like the idea of a central repository for the more important stuff. The random little test dotpups and such could still be elsewhere, but "finished" stuff could go there. What I'd like to see is an "official" site to find them at. However, it would support multiple servers so that when it gets full it can keep going. To add a dotpup, you would fill out a form. Optional screenshots and links to forum topic. There would be categories to place stuff, and options to change the category of the package. When you click "upload" it would automatically decide which server to put it on. Search would also be necissary. Actual file location would be independant of category, so changing them wouldn't affect links (to the page, not the actual file, though that would work too). Then there could even be ranking or most-popular statistics for those who are looking for something new.

In that case, a newer dotpup downloader would work and be much more efficient.

As for dotpup and pupget, I say keep them separate. Like G2 said, pupget packages are what puppy is made of. They are really unleashed packages, not pupget packages, and are choosen when you make a new puppy. Dotpups are extra stuff for after. You can almost think of Pupget as the stuff in Windows like character map, solitare, paint, and hyper-terminal. They are optional when you install it, and you can come back later and put them in. But Firefox, Starcraft, and Context are third-party things that are installed later.

I like both systems, but I don't want them mixed, because that would hurt them both. They are cool, but they are separate. Like how men and women are booth equal, but they are not identical. You don't want to combine us and populate the world with he-shes. Instead, you enjoy the differences of both. Same with food. Pizza is good, and tacos are good too. But if you combine them you loose the subtle differences between them, their pros and cons neutralize, and you are left with something edible but not as enjoyable as eating each separately.

That doesn't mean that guys can't inform someone about a girl, a pizza place can't suggest a taco joint, or a dotpup program can't reccomend the pupget program. They can even socialize with eachother. They just shouldn't become one. Because that is just wierd.

Those are just my thoughts though.

[Flash]

No more pizza for you tonight!

Why can't all 3rd-party applications be done like Firefox and Thunderbird are? Just unzip them wherever, open the folder, click and run. No "installation" necessary, and "uninstalling" them is even easier: just delete the folder.

That's not a rhetorical question, I'm serious.

[deshlab]

Windows programs are of no use outside Windows (unless you use emulatores, but that's not the point and can work in reverse anyways).

True
What I meant to say was that the Puppyverse has a center and the Windows Wastelands haven't. At this point of time almost any dotpup will be spread via this forum or it won't be spread at all (afaik) so a repository could be set up. If this is done in a clever way (there have been very smart ideas in this thread about that) the repository can even become an extremely attracting feature of puppy.

That said, I do like the idea of a central repository for the more important stuff. The random little test dotpups and such could still be elsewhere, but "finished" stuff could go there.

There should definitively be a "beta" section like there is in the wiki lists now for the potentially problematic stuff. If the repository would include a rating system there could also be a function to flag a dotpup as 'problematic' and if an entry gets a certain number of those flags it the server would move it into the beta section and add an automatic comment to the description. I don't know if such a system is worth the effort though.

[GuestToo]

Why can't all 3rd-party applications be done like Firefox and Thunderbird are? Just unzip them wherever, open the folder, click and run. No "installation" necessary, and "uninstalling" them is even easier: just delete the folder.

they usually can

some of my roxapp packages are like this

a roxapp is just a folder like any other folder, but it can also have an icon, an executable that runs if you click the folder, a Help folder, and a right-click context menu

if it's an application that starts with a click of the mouse, the program that runs can setup symlinks and PATHs and LD_LIBRARY_PATHs so that it will run anywhere you put it

Xampp runs like this ... Xampp is all setup to run in /opt/xampp ... since Puppy's /opt is in ram, my Xampp package installs anywhere and puts a symlink in /opt when it runs, so it thinks it's in /opt (but it really isn't)