Barney, on 09 September 2012 - 19:38, said:
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!
Nice words of encouragement, thanks for that! Totally agree with the above sentiment.
Stocker360, on 09 September 2012 - 21:09, said:
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?
ARCH was agreed on at the beginning of the project and should be adhered too. The fact that ARCH is based on bare minimum to start with gives a clean base from which to work with and also that pacman is an excellent package manager to go forward with.
The beauty of pacman is that it is a utility which manages software packages and uses simple compressed files as a package format, and also maintains a text-based package database (more of a hierarchy) just in case some hand tweaking is necessary.
Pacman does not strive to "do everything." It will add, remove and upgrade packages in the system, and it will allow you to query the package database for installed packages, files and owners. It also attempts to handle dependencies automatically and can download packages from a remote server.
ARCH also has a few excellent "rollback" mechanisms in the event that added software needs to be uninstalled. That Arch Linux is a rolling release also ensures that the system is always up-to-date. The repositories are fantastically maintained and on the very rare occasion that something breaks there is always help on the front page detailing the workaround or fix.
I use ARCH on both of my boxes that I use in my office so yes, I am slightly biased but if I can get a grip then anyone can! It's a strong, good operating system and runs well on new as well as old architecture. I have ARCH with "systemd" and "awesome" running on my old 3500+ Athlone and it runs like an express train! Also everything works perfectly.
Thanks, just my 5 cents.