[Shift2] Dead?

[n_K]

Seems to be no-one active on it anymore then? :(

Just as I got sorted to work on it.

So what's the status of people and does anyone else want to join in on making Shift2 a reality?

[Nothing Here]

I was going to try and help, but I just can't do it based off Arch, so I stepped back. Don't know what happened to anyone else.

[ViperAFK]

totally didn't see this coming /sarcasm

[CentralDogma]

Chances are, if you have to ask if an open source project is dead, it's dead.

[Nothing Here]

If it would have been based on Fedora or Debian, it would still be getting worked on by me.

[n_K]

Sod it, I'll work on it anyway.

[Nothing Here]

Chances are, if you have to ask if an open source project is dead, it's dead.

At least the project lead could have stated something and not just leave everyone in the dark. Everyone understands that RL can keep you away from things, but when that person is still popping in and out like it's the thing to do and not even post an update or something isn't cool.

[Duffydemon]

Really busy in new job, will still try to help with graphics part.

[Matthew_Thepc]

No one's updated the Github repo yet :\

I was just waiting for you guys to get the building/installer/etc. stuff working before I help out on the easy stuff ;)

[Nothing Here]

Really busy in new job, will still try to help with graphics part.

Nothing on you simrat. This falls squarely on the shoulders of the project lead.

[Yorak]

I was going to try and help, but I just can't do it based off Arch, so I stepped back. Don't know what happened to anyone else.

And why is that?

[Haggis Veteran]

as soon as someone can get arch running gui with networking off a live cd then i can do it

[Yorak]

as soon as someone can get arch running gui with networking off a live cd then i can do it

What is so hard about it? I am just curious. To connect to a wireless network with WPA2, all you do is (off the top of my head):

wpa_passphrase ESSID "Password" > /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicant.conf
wpa_supplicant -B -Dwext -i wlan0 -c /etc/wpa_supplicant/wpa_supplicanf.conf
dhcpcd wlan0
[/CODE]

[Barney T. Administrators]

Before anyone starts pointing fingers, I just wanted to add that a project like this requires distinctive roles of developers, graphics people, PR people, and the like. It also requires a roadmap that eveyone on the team understands and follows. The importance of good orgaization and communication can not be under emphasizied. It also requires regular, organized meetings to sort out issues and assign tasks.

No one should be discouraged if the project slows down or speeds up. The ups and downs are a part of the journey. It took 3 years to get Shift up and running. We had Shift team members come and go......... we had several changes in lead developers. We also had several lapses while we re-organized... It takes time and committment to complete a community project.

If there is a team that is still interested, take your time and work through issues like this. Don't listen to the trolls and distractors. If you guys want this project to succeed, it will.

Just my 2 cents!

Barney

[Nothing Here]

And why is that?

Because I hate Arch. Might as well be Egyptian hieroglyphics. If we can actually base this on Fedora or Debian, then I am all in.

[threesixtyflip]

I'm really sorry guys, had a lot of stuff on my plate atm. I know it isnt cool for me not to post anything, and I apologise, but now that everything personally is sorted, I am still here, and I still want to get this going.

Looking at a few peoples comments, is Arch the best way to go forward, if it looks like there are people that still want to contribute, but wont because of the base choice, would it not be best to change it so we can actually get something started?

[Nothing Here]

I'm really sorry guys, had a lot of stuff on my plate atm. I know it isnt cool for me not to post anything, and I apologise, but now that everything personally is sorted, I am still here, and I still want to get this going.

Looking at a few peoples comments, is Arch the best way to go forward, if it looks like there are people that still want to contribute, but wont because of the base choice, would it not be best to change it so we can actually get something started?

If you take another poll on this, the outcome will point right back to using Arch again. Your the project lead. Take awhile weight the pros and cons, find the best avenue and you make the decision. But no more polls on what it should be based on.

[threesixtyflip]

If you take another poll on this, the outcome will point right back to using Arch again. Your the project lead. Take awhile weight the pros and cons, find the best avenue and you make the decision. But no more polls on what it should be based on.

You raise a good point, im going to have a think about things. Is anyone around on IRC tonight? I should be around for at least the next 2-3 hours.

[Kami-]

Because I hate Arch. Might as well be Egyptian hieroglyphics. If we can actually base this on Fedora or Debian, then I am all in.

Sadly, I can't see a shift in base for the benefit of one extra developer.

What is the root cause of your disdain for Arch?

[Nothing Here]

Arch has taken simple commands and made them difficult or impossible to understand. If everyone feels so strongly in keeping it Arch, then by all means, do so. But how many of you Arch folks are actually willing to help? Very few. So keep it Arch and a few will help. Change it and if you look at the other Shift2 threads, you will see more then just I willing to help.

[n_K]

I'm only working on shift2 if it's arch.

Fedora is distinctly outdated with it's reliance on such an outdated package management system and debian has been forked so many times it's unbelievable.

The point of arch was to get things set up starting from a minimalistic base and do everything manually, if you're using fedora or debian all you'd do it install some defaultly-compiled packages, make an ISO and that's it. I don't see anything skillful, technical or experience-giving about that.

Arch on the other hand, you've got to make your own repos, compile your own packages and set everything up by hand, and that's pretty involved.

Anyway, I'm not sure if we're going with the C# installer? I can get PHP 5.2 compiled with GTK2 support and make a basic installer GUI if not, or unless someone wants to do it in python2 and GTK?

Not sure if it's worth making a live-CD before we've got an installer created? Making a live CD won't be too hard, to get X working you just need to load basic vesa drivers or do lspci and check if an intel/nvidia/ati GPU is present and load the right config and kernel modules or load svga as a backup.

EDIT: In-fact, as choice is best for everyone be involved in, why not all (that want to) make a basic installer in C#, PYGTK oh PHP-GTK or alternative and submit it for people to see what it looks and handles like and we can see which one people prefer?

And I won't be able to get on IRC tonight, on macbook just now reading some stuff before I go to bed ;/

[threesixtyflip]

I'm only working on shift2 if it's arch.

Fedora is distinctly outdated with it's reliance on such an outdated package management system and debian has been forked so many times it's unbelievable.

The point of arch was to get things set up starting from a minimalistic base and do everything manually, if you're using fedora or debian all you'd do it install some defaultly-compiled packages, make an ISO and that's it. I don't see anything skillful, technical or experience-giving about that.

Arch on the other hand, you've got to make your own repos, compile your own packages and set everything up by hand, and that's pretty involved.

Anyway, I'm not sure if we're going with the C# installer? I can get PHP 5.2 compiled with GTK2 support and make a basic installer GUI if not, or unless someone wants to do it in python2 and GTK?

Not sure if it's worth making a live-CD before we've got an installer created? Making a live CD won't be too hard, to get X working you just need to load basic vesa drivers or do lspci and check if an intel/nvidia/ati GPU is present and load the right config and kernel modules or load svga as a backup.

EDIT: In-fact, as choice is best for everyone be involved in, why not all (that want to) make a basic installer in C#, PYGTK oh PHP-GTK or alternative and submit it for people to see what it looks and handles like and we can see which one people prefer?

That is the benefit of going with Arch, more control :)

It is more complex but it pays off.

At the end of the day n_K you are right, if anyone wants to make a basic installer and submit it so we can call all go over it then that is great.

[Nothing Here]

That is the benefit of going with Arch, more control :)

It is more complex but it pays off.

At the end of the day n_K you are right, if anyone wants to make a basic installer and submit it so we can call all go over it then that is great.

Glad to see you took the time to think it over. Typical.

[firey]

I too am busy with life, and other coding projects to focus as much a I planned. I am with n_k in that Arch is the base to go with. I feel Fedora, Debian, etc are already filled to the rafters with tools and utilities, not really a whole lot to add or to make a system out of that is our own. Arch is very very easy to get going even on old hardware. I've installed on numerous devices and have them all setup and running the exact same with little to no issues. I want to dev for an Arch based distro as I feel my code will be much more utillized.

I couldn't get code to upload to the repo. I have the basic gui installer for apps done.

Supports downloading/installing off the official repos, as well as the unzip,makepkg,install of .tar.gz files, and the ability to auto-update. Really all it is is running processes under one program but it saves having to type it all out.

It's nothing fancy and could use a lot of work.. but that said it does function. Overall.. to make an actual system installer is doing the same sort of thing.. running commands and showing some pictures.

[Haggis Veteran]

As i say once the basis GUI is done and it gets me to a desktop

I have tried countless times to get this working and cant

maybe i am just a complete dumbass

at first i thought it was my hardware but then i used archbang which is a Arch Live CD

i then tried to install gnome and borked it

Arch seems way too easy to break, i have even seen some of you guys leaving messages saying broken my arch VM need to redo it