recruitment for a new project
 

hello all,

i have used many distro's and all have their flaws and advantages.

It is my wish to make a New distribution to fix the problems inherent in current distributions.

How might i best go about recruiting?

i would need a couple Devs to help me get a some test versions out; and i would always need help packaging later on.

Actually, the first thing to make people interested in your project would be to tell them about the goals of your project:Nobody knows where you see problems, how you intend to fix those problems and if it is doable (since you ask for developers I assume that you are not a developer). Would be a starting point.

sorry, but it looks strange for me. What problems do you want to fix and how do you want to fix, what is the goal ....

the Goal

to make a Distro that is Stable,up-to-date and easy to use. priorities in that order; though all important

The Plan

To make a Distro Based on Arch linux, with 2 streams and custom Package manager
A rolling release one which freezes in a similar way to Debian Testing (but far more frequently)
A Stable version. this version will get updated package versions once per quarter, except for major bugs or security issues

the plan is to make a decent Version 1 as the architecture and underlying workings of the Distro will not change between Main versions
The main/LTS version will be released once every 2 years and will be supported for a long time (depends on the size team i can get)


1)the testing version will be getting straight-up Arch stable packages from the Package manager, and any bugs will be reported. 2)packages which are 2 weeks old, have been installed 10 times and have no bugs open will be earmarked as possible for stable.
3)One month before the end of the quarter the testing Repo will no longer pull new Arch packages and will focus on bug-hunting
4)the Stable core package and extra Repo are updated at end of quarter and testing repo is un-frozen

the Core package refers to the fact that i aim for a way of making the Quarterly update replace the Whole core of the system so as to reduce bugs from different package combinations. there will be a system to convert config files.
Another benefit of this is it means someone can very easily backdate the Core of their OS, and maybe even switch between.

Other Goals

to port user friendly programs to the Distro;
Ubuntu's software centre is perfect for linux-illiterates
Synaptic or similar can be ported to the new package manager


Why do i want Devs?

because i have never learnt to program :/
and why should i; Bash is good enough for many of the core systems and allows easy configuration.



Any more questions?

Wait, so that I get it: You want to make a distro that has three branches (testing, stable, LTS). You want to base that on Arch, using Debian's package management system with a stable release every 3 months. Canonical, with their massive amount of developers, upstream support, very large community and not to forget a billionaire to spend money into the project, is able to do that every six months, building up on a stable base (Debian, and Ubuntu is not known for their stability), you want to do that in three months, building on a rolling release distro.

I wish you luck that your project will be successful, but I don't think that something like that is possible without access to large resources.

:)

the difference here is i am trying to do less; Ubuntu spends a huge amount of resources on things i would say are unessessary; does a distro really need to have such an odd way of making a kernel? particularly when the same result can be reached with make munuconfig and some good patches.

the idea is not to bum Ubuntu out; just to make a better midpoint between ubuntu, debian stable and Arch.

oh; and only 2 versions; stable and testing. LTS is a stable version just supported for longer.


anyways my question still stands; where should i best go to get some devs attention? i plan on starting anyways, it would just be nice to know i have someone who can actually Code/fix some bitsand bobs, as well as give advice.

I have shooting around the idea of doing a new distribution as well for years, though I am also not a developer.

I have been using GNU/Linux for years and have come to the point where I am about aggravated with many of what's out there. I try about everything, offer to lend a hand where I can and all I ask is a quick dirty howto (I learn fast) and get promised one and get nothing, yet they scream they need help. I am tired of people saying "we seek your opinion" but what they really mean is "we want to hear you, not that we are going to listen".

I want to see a community driven version. One that can be easy and yet feed the inner geek. One that everyone can feel like they have a part even if whomever don't know how to program. Current systems can be confusing. Even scripts for the Arch AUR can leave one scaratching the head.

Imagine a package manager that can really do it all. Pass simple scripts to the package manager and it handles the rest. Something like this:

Then foo.sh has this easy to read syntax:

Package manager went and got the packages and dependencies and made the packages and installed then and converted to a system package (like .deb for instance). Easy to understand! Easy for any newbie to write and do and these compiled packages could even be added to the repository by some means. Now you have a user base of contributors because it is so easy! I mean, who would not want to use something that simple?

Then, you can have something like you mention. A unstable type of branch that rolls (like Debian) and instead of testing, a true rolling release that most will use. Snapshots for a stable release and LTS. Sure, you would need maintainers but but all the package really needs to do is make it through unstable and you would have a good package that could be passed on down the line. Could use back ports and whatnot.

But this would have to be a TRUE system for the people. No per-concieved idea of how this should really go or not. No turning anyone away and if people are eager to learn something, who am I to turn them away? They could only become an asset from that point forward if they are really interested. A true distribution for the people! There is not really one. Slack comes close but I even feel there is closed doors there. I mean, I would have not a idea how to get involved if I wanted to.

Just my 2 cents...

@corbintechboy

if you can spare the time to help; then please join me :)

you seem to have many of the same opinions and idea's as me; when pondering on a quick name for my package manager it was to be called SPaM (simple Package Manager) and the idea was to have an extremely simple package format so that anyone can edit it.

have you ever tried arch? the Wiki would probably make it more of a "peoples distro" in my eyes than Slack due to the huge number of contributions. the only problem is that i feel linux needs to try to ride the wave when Windows 8 comes out and people realise how terrible it is; this is why i want to try and port software like the Software centre.

sorry if this is illegible i am pretty damn tired :)

I was also a bit tired last night. My response looks like a train wreck lol.

I have used Arch actually for a long time. Then there was a time I needed help because an update broke my system and I was flamed for asking. I stopped using it. Arch is a very good distribution ruined by elitist users IMHO. I am a bit political in what I use, a flaw I suppose.

I would be willing to help. You can just PM me with any collaboration details and we can talk. I will help where I can for sure.

Fantastic!

well i'm a bit on and off with work at the moment (very on at the moment) so i cant get anything done really until the end of the month/just before.