NeoLin - Who's in?


Recommended Posts

I see people mentioning using debian source and using arch source yet no-one seems to know which we're using?

I'm anti-debian because it's old, clanky, and the cause of a lot of problems for it's bad support system with the leap second recently.

Any idea what distro we're going with or what?

I think Stocker (our PM) has decided on Arch, so unless someone can point out a very good reason to use Debian, I think we should focus our energy on Arch.

I see people mentioning using debian source and using arch source yet no-one seems to know which we're using?

I'm anti-debian because it's old, clanky, and the cause of a lot of problems for it's bad support system with the leap second recently.

Any idea what distro we're going with or what?

No one said we have to use Debian Stable. Debian Testing with some select backports from Unstable will work just as well. Especially with Testing being frozen for the Debian 7.0 release later this year this ensures a stable, yet somewhat current basis.

Nah, rebecca black linux!

http://sourceforge.net/projects/rebeccablackos/

---

On a serious note, I think experimenting with Wayland instead/with X11 would be awesome, if we could get a stable working distro with Wayland WM as default out, it'd be a leap forward for linux as a whole ;)

Nah, rebecca black linux!

http://sourceforge.n...rebeccablackos/

---

On a serious note, I think experimenting with Wayland instead/with X11 would be awesome, if we could get a stable working distro with Wayland WM as default out, it'd be a leap forward for linux as a whole ;)

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Wayland looks like Arch would be able to do it, but is there any real reason we should?

On a serious note, I think experimenting with Wayland instead/with X11 would be awesome, if we could get a stable working distro with Wayland WM as default out, it'd be a leap forward for linux as a whole ;)

I have been following Wayland development for some time now. They are not quite there yet. I do not understand most of their technicalities but yeah not good for the first release at least. May be second.

Also, I have to ask, Why Arch and not Debian? OR ubuntu for that matter? On what basis are we discussing this?

n_K how about you becoming the lead developer?

#shift ;)

Nice one! :)

As for wayland, its still in heavy development/testing atm. I think for now its probably best to stick for something that we know will work.

I think I will create a poll for the base. If there is some good reasons why we should be using X base, then put them in there :)

In theory, waylay does work, you can run X inside of it :).

That'd be something special, a distribution with wayland by default, only rebecca black OS has it atm and it's not got constant updates. Get it working well and whatnot. Who knows.

'n_K how about you becoming the lead developer?'

Literally haven't got a clue what that actually entails :/

In theory, waylay does work, you can run X inside of it :).

That'd be something special, a distribution with wayland by default, only rebecca black OS has it atm and it's not got constant updates. Get it working well and whatnot. Who knows.

In theory yes. You actually bypass some old X protocols. Its changes a few things and renders most of the window managers and desktop environments useless. There are lots of work going on to make some of them (DE/WM) work on wayland and we have some working prototype but they are still prototype. We will have lots of trouble just making it work.

If you still insist we can get wayland working by using DE specifically made to work with it.

In theory yes. You actually bypass some old X protocols. Its changes a few things and renders most of the window managers and desktop environments useless. There are lots of work going on to make some of them (DE/WM) work on wayland and we have some working prototype but they are still prototype. We will have lots of trouble just making it work.

If you still insist we can get wayland working by using DE specifically made to work with it.

What are the actual benefits of using Wayland though?

What are the actual benefits of using Wayland though?

XOrg is pretty old and was not designed to be used with compositing and things like that. They added that later on and many such tweaks and additions made XOrg a complete mess.

Wayland is basically XOrg with its mess sorted out.

Refer to these links:

http://askubuntu.com...-wayland-better

http://wayland.freed...chitecture.html

Why the hell doesn't the Neowin community turn all of it's workforce into a single existing distro instead of segmenting the efforts with a newborn newcomer that will have little chances to accomplish anything other than fulfilling a whim?

Well any code we produce that is useful to the base distro can be pushed upstream (assuming upstream would accept). :)

  • Like 1

Why the hell doesn't the Neowin community turn all of it's workforce into a single existing distro instead of segmenting the efforts with a newborn newcomer that will have little chances to accomplish anything other than fulfilling a whim?

Thing of everything you could do if you supported a distro that could use your hand. That would be a much better service to humanity. If i could code i would gladly join you in that enterprise but unfortunately i can't, but could serve with translation into spanish.

Cheers.

Why doesn't the neowin community read the ****ing thread before commenting?

'n_K how about you becoming the lead developer?'

Literally haven't got a clue what that actually entails :/

The Lead Developer is the person that holds the reins for actually developing the distro. This includes directing other coders for various parts, creating and compiling code, branding, and making reasonable milestone and release dates for the different releases. In essence, the lead developer directis the development of the distro. In contrast, the Project Manager coordinates and is the liasion with all of the areas (devs, graphics, web content, public relations, and all the other bits that are needed) and orchestrates all of them to make the whole system work.

#shift

That's your Neowin Shift IRC channel

  • Like 1

Okay here's an idea, a crazy one I know but worth a shot I guess.

How about some-what native support for gamers? Instead of messing around with Wine it would do all that silently? I'm not even sure if that can be done? It has crossed my mind before but I was to embarassed to ask lol :blush:

E: I know gaming ain't Linux main point but it would still get some gamers involved lol :laugh:

That aside I'd love to help. Whatever I can do...

Sadly, never going to happen as long as Direct X is used for the majority of commercial games. Look how long it's taken to achieve binary compatibility with old win32 apps, achieving complete API compatibility is still a lifetime away as of yet.

OK, newbie question for those of you who've done this before, how are we going to do it? Will we start with an Arch installation and then install/uninstall/modify etc. some stuff, and then turn that into an ISO to distribute, or are we going to take the Arch source, modify it, take some other package sources, modify them, then install the moded Arch and then in stall or what? Sorry again if I've got it all wrong :p

but a set of people with a taste for a common news site, and not many are serious programmers nor have all the spare time in the world

Refocus your labor of love ;) I'll leave you thinking about that.

I suppose you haven't read the thread also you don't posses manners as it was specifically mentioned in first post that trolls are not allowed here!

As for what you have to say, well this Linux is distro is not to add one to list of many, we wanted to learn so we are doing this. If you have a problem go and rant about it somewhere else. And Shift 1 was quite a success if I remember correctly.

If you ask me, even if one person is using my distro, its quite big an achievement for me. Its my choice that I build my own distro or do whatever from my knowledge. Also how do you know we can't do this!

As far as work for distro itself is considered, the work that we do here could be reported to upstream distros...

And Shift 1 was quite a success if I remember correctly.

:yes:

Shift was a resounding success with well over 100,000 downloads and was listed as one of the top 40 Linux distros on Distrowatch. We were registered with The Linux Foundation as an official distro, and we're a member of the Open Invitation Network. But more importantly, members of our community got the chance to experience creating a distro from scratch. The Shift project did exactly what it was designed to do. It brought our Neowin linux community together for an outstanding experience that lasted well over 2 years.

I attach with this post the version with the 2.

post-4652-0-48387500-1341286456_thumb.jp

However I'm not sure we should add the number direct to the logo.

The logo could be the main branding, just as Ubuntu has it's logo independent of the release.

What we can do is to have a main distro logo and a release logo. Why? Differentiation. If Ubuntu can have different ridiculous names for every release why couldn't we have visual distinctions for each release?

Im letting my mind to run wild since Im doing what I always wanted to see in a Linux distro: Elegance, attention to detail, CONSISTENT DESIGN AMONG RELEASES, memorable branding (only Ubuntu has managed to do this). Something that can appeal not only to the geeks and hobbyist sense of design.

post-4652-0-45678600-1341286460_thumb.jp

I don't quite like how that turned out, but it was done in five minutes. Months of refinement will make a world of difference.

What do you all think?

I love the design. Looks really good

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Calling GTA 6 overhyped crap doesn’t make you edgy, it just makes you sound like someone who hasn’t enjoyed anything since the PS2 era.
    • I’m not arguing whether Rockstar likes money. Obviously, they do, they’re a business. I’m saying this isn’t new. They’ve always launched console first. This is just how Rockstar operates.
    • I'm not sure how old the school is, but they've been doing this since GTA 3. Back in those days we'd be lucky for game companies to release on the PC at all. And with the current state of Sony (or Microsoft) their gaming wing won't be getting a penny from me.
    • We now know when and how the Universe may truly end by Sayan Sen Image by Marek Pavlík via Pexels| Not representative A study by physicist Henry Tye of Cornell University suggests that the universe may not expand forever. Instead, it could eventually stop expanding, begin contracting and end in a "Big Crunch" roughly 20 billion years from now. The research, published in the Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics, was conducted by Tye, Horace White Professor of Physics Emeritus at Cornell University. Using recent observations from major dark-energy surveys, Tye and his collaborators developed a cosmological model that predicts the universe could have a total lifespan of about 33 billion years. Since the universe is currently estimated to be 13.8 billion years old, the model places it near the midpoint of its existence. According to Cornell University's summary of the research, the study centers on the cosmological constant, a term introduced by Albert Einstein in his theory of general relativity. In modern cosmology, the cosmological constant is commonly used to describe the simplest form of dark energy, the unknown phenomenon believed to be driving the accelerating expansion of the universe. "For the last 20 years, people believed that the cosmological constant is positive, and the universe will expand forever," Tye said in a Cornell University news release. "The new data seem to indicate that the cosmological constant is negative, and that the universe will end in a big crunch." The study draws on data from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) and the Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI), two major projects designed to investigate the nature of dark energy. According to Tye, recent observations suggest that dark energy may not behave exactly like a simple cosmological constant. To account for those observations, Tye and his collaborators proposed a model involving an extremely light hypothetical particle that evolves over time. In their calculations, this produces a negative cosmological constant and leads to a future collapse of the universe. The model predicts that cosmic expansion would continue for approximately another 11 billion years before reaching a maximum size, after which the universe would begin contracting and eventually collapse. Scientists have long debated how the universe might end. As explained in an article published in The Conversation by Stephen DiKerby of Michigan State University, several possibilities have been proposed. If dark energy remains constant and positive, the universe could continue expanding indefinitely, gradually becoming colder, darker and more diffuse in a scenario often called the "heat death" of the universe. Other theoretical possibilities include a Big Rip, in which cosmic expansion accelerates so dramatically that galaxies, stars and even atoms are torn apart, or a Big Crunch, in which expansion reverses and the universe collapses back into an extremely dense state. DiKerby notes that the Big Crunch idea itself is not new. What distinguishes Tye's work is that it attempts to use current observational data to estimate when such a collapse might occur and how it could unfold. Much of the universe's long-term evolution remains uncertain. According to current astrophysical understanding, stars will continue to form and die for billions of years. The Sun, for example, is about halfway through its expected lifespan. Galaxies are also expected to continue merging; the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies are projected to collide several billion years from now. At the same time, the nature of dark energy remains one of the biggest unanswered questions in cosmology. While observations indicate that the universe's expansion is accelerating, scientists still do not know what is causing that acceleration. Future observations may therefore alter current predictions about the cosmos's ultimate fate. Tye emphasized that additional evidence will be needed before firm conclusions can be drawn. DESI continues to collect data, while upcoming observations from missions and observatories including Euclid, SPHEREx and the Vera C. Rubin Observatory are expected to provide more precise measurements of dark energy. "People have said before that if the cosmological constant is negative, then the universe will collapse eventually. That's not new," Tye said. "However, here the model tells you when the universe collapses and how it collapses." For now, the study presents one possible future for the cosmos rather than a settled prediction. Whether the universe ultimately ends in a Big Crunch, expands forever, or follows another path entirely remains an open question that future observations will help answer. Source: Cornell University, The Conversation This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • If you look around on Amazon, some of these are available for $9
  • Recent Achievements

    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      With What earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      570
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      175
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      73
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      68
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!