(old)Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

it does seem rather a shame that someone takes the time to sign up in order to praise Puppy & offer encouragement to do better, and yet is treated with condescension - as if, not one of the True Believers and thus dismissed.

paulh177 wrote:it does seem rather a shame that someone takes the time to sign up in order to praise Puppy & offer encouragement to do better, and yet is treated with condescension - as if, not one of the True Believers and thus dismissed.

Perhaps the mistake was to say anything critical.

Similar to the child that blurts out that ""he Emperor has no clothes!"

As I said Paul,

"Maybe, just maybe....everyone's take on 'the community' is different, including yours"

You are making an assumption as to why he joined the forum.....

".... in order to praise Puppy & offer encouragement to do better...."

& also that 'he was treated with condescension' because of it...

Vive la Puppy différence!

Aitch

jemimah wrote:Detail-oriented, quality control stuff is rather difficult to get excited about.

Perhaps Puppy is just waiting for the people for whom testing, organizing, documenting, and putting the finishing touches on things is pure joy, to show up and start working.

I’m one of those people who can get excited about QC. I’m a detail oriented, perfectionist, SOB but I’m not about to waste my time reporting bugs or making thoughtful suggestions when they fall on deaf ears. My talents are too valuable to be squandered on such fruitless pursuits.

If however I saw proof that developers were serious about fixing problems/bugs before launching new versions I would bend over backwards to help. My two cents.

please don't tell me what i'm assuming aitch

Volhout wrote:I am a puppy user for 1 year now, and I am impressed with the quality and dedication of the people that work on Puppy and it's derivatives. I have never seen so much good work come from a worldwide distributed group of people.

The one thing that is missing to make Puppy a worldwide hit (blazing Ubuntu from the chart) is structure.

paulh177 wrote:it does seem rather a shame that someone takes the time to sign up in order to praise Puppy & offer encouragement to do better, and yet is treated with condescension - as if, not one of the True Believers and thus dismissed.

Volhout signed up in 2008. He has also been a Puppy user for 1 year. The second paragraph clearly indicates his motive. Some would agree with it and others not. No criticism intended either way.

Structure just isn't Puppy - at least not the way it is described by Mr Kauler. Puppy doesn't have the resources to be "a worldwide hit (blazing Ubuntu from the the chart)", regardless of whether some may want that and others may not. Ubuntu has a millionaire driving it; Barry lives in a shack. Fedora has Red Hat commercial driving it; Barry charges $9 for a CD. OpenSUSE has Novell, Mandriva has ... whatever. Puppy OTOH has developers who do it when they want and it is simply "fun". It's not condescending to point that out. It just "is" what it "is".

When I came here I came with my eyes open and a full understanding that this would not be my mission critical OS - I'm still conflicted between Ubuntu and OpenSUSE for that. I expected a fun OS that I could play around with and learn from. That's what I got and a whole lot more besides. Lucky me!

Those with older hardware who use Puppy because it is functional on old equipment probably couldn't give a hoot if it blows Ubuntu away. They just want it to be easy to use, and there's the dilemma; if there are bugs it takes a kind soul with spare time and the knowledge and desire to fix it. Someone like MU, Pizzasgood, Patriot, etc. No-one here is on the payroll. Structure won't make bug-chasing a favourite pastime either. Even Mr Kauler admits he hates to do the hard yards in bug-fixing. It's a hobby for him too.

Like jemimah said, we just need someone who wants to take on that challenging and often thankless role and run with it. If someone does come along and put their hand up to do the bug chasing I'm sure we'd all GRAB THEM WITH BOTH HANDS and hold on tight! Patriot started playing with CUPS. Thank goodness he is still here and hasn't got bored yet. If it stops being fun for him I'd guess he'll fade away as others have. That's the nature of a small, voluntary project.

puppyite wrote:

jemimah wrote:Detail-oriented, quality control stuff is rather difficult to get excited about.

Perhaps Puppy is just waiting for the people for whom testing, organizing, documenting, and putting the finishing touches on things is pure joy, to show up and start working.

I’m one of those people who can get excited about QC. I’m a detail oriented, perfectionist, SOB but I’m not about to waste my time reporting bugs or making thoughtful suggestions when they fall on deaf ears. My talents are too valuable to be squandered on such fruitless pursuits.

If however I saw proof that developers were serious about fixing problems/bugs before launching new versions I would bend over backwards to help. My two cents.

i don't see it as effort falling on deaf ears. sure it will be noted and someone will one day get a handle on it and do something about it, but they also have a life to lead and a priority list of their own. if you feel that keeping an updated list of current bugs is a high priority and would like to do it yourself then yes surely it would be very welcomed. but if you do not it then you can also understand why others haven't already done it before you. the other option is recurrent gentle reminders on issues you feel need to be done when you are most motivate to give those reminders. else if you have the skills build your own fix and post a pet if it is critical or well needed it will get into the official puppy. this is just my take on the situation through observation and an amateur view point.

amateur view point.

a professional is simply someone who gets paid for what they do.....so yes all amateurs here.
One major reason there are puppy users regardless of the chaotic nature is our amateur friendliness...no one claims to be perfect. Try socialising on any other distro forum or chat and you will soon feel the difference. I think ubuntu is the closest to human which probably helps its popularity.
If I go to a store and am greeted by condescending snobbery I never return regardless of the quality of the product.
Puppy is linux for the masses not the elite. Sure I've spotted a few major clangers but at least I can get to rant and/or discuss them without being banned.
There are also some very clever 'amateurs' here and I appreciate their skills and wisdom being put into puppy.
Ok...look at puppy as a linux jumble sale...you might just get a bargain

regards

mike

mikeb wrote:One major reason there are puppy users regardless of the chaotic nature is our amateur friendliness...

Glad to hear that, mikeb. In a few posts of yours circa the announcement of OfficeOffice sfs4, your friendliness seemed hidden in your pocket.

Ah, Patriot, he is two things to the project: the person and the ideal. And the person lives up to the ideal. Couldn't ask for more.

..bear(s) are fun to be around, too..

So really, it's being here and doing fun things that matter (um, making work fun to do). And it's fun because people are different. I can't explain it but I trust craftybear can.

Glad to hear that, mikeb. In a few posts of yours circa the announcement of OfficeOffice sfs4, your friendliness seemed hidden in your pocket.

Well if I didn't care I wouldn't get emotional about it. And I also pointed out that being free to express one's feelings was a positive part of the puppy community as long as it's not personel attacks.... pure coincidence that you happened to be on the 2 threads where I was a little frayed at the edges.

regards

mike

edit...my first ever post here...I guess barry was having an off day
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=13024

I just read through this thread (because I am sad!), and it strikes me as massively unfair. Puppy exists for anyone who wants to get involved, and all suggestions are welcome. This leads to constant change/development. How could it be otherwise without becoming something less?

Ok raffy you have me going now....

I wouldn't particularily include myself in the friendly bracket. On the other hand you were the first person that was polite to me and ackowledged something I had posted about (mplayer filling up xerrs.log) and probably the reason I stayed here...such things are not forgotten.
So yes, definately friendlier and more open and tolerant than other places.

mike

mikeb wrote:Ok raffy you have me going now....

I wouldn't particularily include myself in the friendly bracket. On the other hand you were the first person that was polite to me and ackowledged something I had posted about (mplayer filling up xerrs.log) and probably the reason I stayed here...such things are not forgotten.
So yes, definately friendlier and more open and tolerant than other places.

mike

And you got this really cool avatar Mike

puppyite wrote:I’m one of those people who can get excited about QC. I’m a detail oriented, perfectionist, SOB but I’m not about to waste my time reporting bugs or making thoughtful suggestions when they fall on deaf ears. My talents are too valuable to be squandered on such fruitless pursuits.

If however I saw proof that developers were serious about fixing problems/bugs before launching new versions I would bend over backwards to help. My two cents.

aarf wrote:I don't see it as effort falling on deaf ears.

This fell on deaf ears: Pburn 2.2.2 locks up

the other option is recurrent gentle reminders on issues you feel need to be done when you are most motivated to give those reminders.

That sounds too much like begging.

else if you have the skills build your own fix and post a pet if it is critical or well needed it will get into the official puppy.

No I'm not a programmer, would that I were. I can say that I take enough pride in what I do regardless of whether or not I'm paid that everything I do is the very best I can make it. Leaving things half done or partly broken is against my very nature, but I realize some peoples MMV in this respect.

Thanks for trying to help aarf.

puppyite wrote:This fell on deaf ears: Pburn 2.2.2 locks up

Sigmund isn't deaf; just very, very busy. He has a multitude of projects he maintains for Puppy. Pburn is one of the best and longest running. I have no doubt the problem is on his ToDo list UNLESS he has decided that it is too specific to a single version of Pburn and the OS to go chasing, or there is the possibility of a hardware-specific issue. Is there a later version that does work on that version and machine?

puppyite wrote:

the other option is recurrent gentle reminders on issues you feel need to be done when you are most motivated to give those reminders.

That sounds too much like begging.

AND it depends on how "recurrent" the "gentle reminders" are, too. Volunteers walk when they stop enjoying their hobby. Annoy them and they will stop enjoying it sooner.

puppyite wrote:No I'm not a programmer, would that I were. I can say that I take enough pride in what I do regardless of whether or not I'm paid that everything I do is the very best I can make it. Leaving things half done or partly broken is against my very nature, but I realize some peoples MMV in this respect.

Having been a programmer I can say there is "half done" and HALF done. When you program in a group environment, often what you do is broken by what someone else does and vice versa. If two programmers each produce half of a package, and their half works properly in its own right, should either be blamed if the consolidated package doesn't work?

Linux, by its very nature, is an environment that lives or dies on the successful integration of a multitude of separately developed parts. Only the big dogs have enough money and control over their distribution to take most of the hit or miss integration out of the equation, and they still get it wrong sometimes.

Puppy is living proof in the pride of workmanship concept. It wouldn't exist at all if it weren't. Many others have long since gone the way of the dinosaur. I'm sure we could all name more than a few amateur distributions that are no more. Will Puppy go that way too? Maybe. I hope not. To ensure that doesn't happen we need to keep our volunteer devs having fun and enjoying their hobby time with us, and be forever patient if they say "tomorrow" and we want it "now".

craftybear wrote:Sigmund isn't deaf;

I never said he was. When I say deaf I mean the thread never received even one single reply.

Is there a later version that does work on that version and machine?

No and that question proves you didn’t even bother to read the link I gave before you made your reply because in that thread (and it's included links) I gave a complete account of the bug.

AND it depends on how "recurrent" the "gentle reminders" are, too. Volunteers walk when they stop enjoying their hobby. Annoy them and they will stop enjoying it sooner.

In the dictionary I use, begging does not translate to annoy. Never have I annoyed a dev, nor would I. Do you assume I would be stupid enough to annoy someone who is earnestly trying to help me? BS

Having been a programmer I can say there is "half done" and HALF done. When you program in a group environment, often what you do is broken by what someone else does and vice versa. If two programmers each produce half of a package, and their half works properly in its own right, should either be blamed if the consolidated package doesn't work?

If something fails because there is an unwillingness to cooperate or an inability to coordinate ventures jointly to reach a successful conclusion then in my mind the responsible parties share the blame. But YMMV and based on the statement you just made I strongly suspect it does.

Linux, by its very nature, is an environment that lives or dies on the successful integration of a multitude of separately developed parts. Only the big dogs have enough money and control over their distribution to take most of the hit or miss integration out of the equation, and they still get it wrong sometimes.

I disagree. Many volunteer efforts who have little or no financial backing are extraordinarily successful due in no small part to their superb organization and good organization does not cost money.

Puppy is living proof in the pride of workmanship concept. It wouldn't exist at all if it weren't. Many others have long since gone the way of the dinosaur. I'm sure we could all name more than a few amateur distributions that are no more. Will Puppy go that way too? Maybe. I hope not. To ensure that doesn't happen we need to keep our volunteer devs having fun and enjoying their hobby time with us, and be forever patient if they say "tomorrow" and we want it "now".

If we do nothing in the mean time tomorrow may only contain the same problems.

We likely have different ideas about the exact nature of “pride of workmanship

All I would add is that a forum does not make a good bugtracker, or a good wiki, or a good repository....etc..after all a forum is designed for discussion.

mike

mikeb wrote:All I would add is that a forum does not make a good bugtracker, or a good wiki, or a good repository....etc..after all a forum is designed for discussion.

mike

Hi Mike,
How would we go about creating a good bugtracker? I welcome your suggestions.

puppyite wrote:

mikeb wrote:All I would add is that a forum does not make a good bugtracker, or a good wiki, or a good repository....etc..after all a forum is designed for discussion.

mike

Hi Mike,
How would we go about creating a good bugtracker? I welcome your suggestions.

maybe this will be of use http://www.bugzilla.org/about/

aarf wrote:

puppyite wrote:Hi Mike,
How would we go about creating a good bugtracker? I welcome your suggestions.

maybe this will be of use http://www.bugzilla.org/about/

Thanks aarf, at a glance that looks perfect. I will definitely take time to look at it carefully.

There is one big question left: How do we get developers to participate in this system in such a way that users will feel their needs are being met and that therefore reporting bugs is a productive endeavor? I.E. Bugs are fixed in a timely manner. IMO this will make or break any bug tracking system. I would greatly appreciate suggestions/solutions concerning this point.