Quá ít 2012 beta

[Thomas Fröhlich]

today you can find a new iso there:
Quait2012-betai586-011111.iso
BUT this is just to testing, then the base is from PCLOS and notrebuilded MDV-rpms, so you must to beware of the dog, he can ....
BUT as a Preview for 2012 of a working UnityLinux-BASE ... i hope so much...

- a few scripts and pieces of Qi are not into this ISO..... must wait

- newer theme include (little artwork from me)
- now i hope can solve the mintMenu<->python<->UL/MDV/PCLOS - problematic, that should be upcoming with a Quáít2012RC

Greetings

[Matthew Dawkins]

--
PLEASE REMOVE THIS FOOTER WHEN REPLYING & REPLY BENEATH IT!
Unsubscribe: ul-developer...@googlegroups.com
More options: http://groups.google.com/group/ul-developers

Cool! Nice to see you around!

[Thomas Fröhlich]

2011/11/1 Matthew Dawkins <matt...@gmail.com>

Matthew i would it's based on UL! by PCLOS not all rpms keep the same line on icons, .desktopfiles and much more.
But you knowing my phobia of SVN :|
Greetings

[JohnW57]

Thomas: PCLOS is not UL and you did release a beta release with the
branchename Qua It.
You did remaster a PCLOS install with mylivecd (modified mklivecd) and
this have nothing to do with UL!!
Please release a BETA under the name from the UL branch with the MDV
packages and made with your tools!!
Devnet said to me: PCLOS is a another beast (in a blog).
Respect that!! (this not a flame as PCLOS member against UL)

JohnW57

On 1 nov, 18:13, Thomas Fröhlich <oh.qu...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> 2011/11/1 Matthew Dawkins <matty...@gmail.com>

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Thomas Fröhlich <oh.qu...@googlemail.com>wrote:
>
> >> today you can find a new iso there:

> >> Quait2012-betai586-011111.iso<http://www.qu%C3%A1-%C3%ADt.de/pub/quait/iso/Quait2012-betai586-01111...>

[Matthew Dawkins]

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 6:36 PM, JohnW57 <joh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thomas: Why did you release as UL beta branch release?
It's a modified PCLOS remaster and UL is based on MDV core.
You used a PCLOS modified mklivecd and other PCLOS  tools to
"remaster  as  Qua It
Devnet said in one the latest blog: PCLOS is a another beast!
(this is not a flame)

JohnW57

On tools ? nov, 18:13, Thomas Fröhlich <oh.qu...@googlemail.com>

wrote:
> 2011/11/1 Matthew Dawkins <matty...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> > On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 7:34 AM, Thomas Fröhlich <oh.qu...@googlemail.com>wrote:

>
> >> today you can find a new iso there:

> >> Quait2012-betai586-011111.iso<http://www.qu%C3%A1-%C3%ADt.de/pub/quait/iso/Quait2012-betai586-01111...>

> >> BUT this is just to testing, then the base is from PCLOS and notrebuilded
> >> MDV-rpms, so you must to beware of the dog, he can .... [image: Wink]
> >> BUT as a Preview for 2012 of a working UnityLinux-BASE ... i hope so
> >> much...
>
> >> - a few scripts and pieces of Qi are not into this ISO..... must wait [image:
> >> Wink]
>
> >> - newer theme include (little artwork from me)
> >> - now i hope can solve the mintMenu<->python<->UL/MDV/PCLOS -
> >> problematic, that should be upcoming with a Quáít2012RC
>
> >> Greetings
>
> >> --
> >> PLEASE REMOVE THIS FOOTER WHEN REPLYING & REPLY BENEATH IT!
> >> Unsubscribe: ul-developer...@googlegroups.com
> >> More options:http://groups.google.com/group/ul-developers
>
> > Cool! Nice to see you around!
>
> Matthew i would it's based on UL! by PCLOS not all rpms keep the same line
> on icons, .desktopfiles and much more.
> But you knowing my phobia of SVN :|
> Greetings

--
PLEASE REMOVE THIS FOOTER WHEN REPLYING & REPLY BENEATH IT!
Unsubscribe: ul-developer...@googlegroups.com
More options: http://groups.google.com/group/ul-developers

JohnW57's comments are welcome here anytime.

John, As far as I am concerned, Qua It is Thomas' personal project and he is more than welcome to re-base it off of any project even pclos.

Synergy (Jmiahman) decided he wanted to go the fedora route...

In my mind this is all for hobby and we are all working for the same goal.

[devnet]

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Matthew Dawkins <matt...@gmail.com> wrote:

JohnW57's comments are welcome here anytime.

John, As far as I am concerned, Qua It is Thomas' personal project and he is more than welcome to re-base it off of any project even pclos.

Synergy (Jmiahman) decided he wanted to go the fedora route...

In my mind this is all for hobby and we are all working for the same goal.

I also agree with this.  It's Linux so we all win :)

Once we stabilize on the MDV repositories here I'm sure he'll move over :)

[Thomas Fröhlich]

2011/11/3 devnet <dev...@gmail.com>

--

so hmmm, ok, that's my fault...
let my knowing, if we have a working ISO, then i will rebase Qi to UL

[Kaleb]

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 8:08 PM, JohnW57 <joh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Thomas: PCLOS is not UL and you did release a beta release with  the
branchename Qua It.
You did remaster a PCLOS install with mylivecd (modified mklivecd) and
this have nothing to do with UL!!
Please release a BETA under the name from the UL branch with the MDV
packages and made with your tools!!
Devnet said to me:  PCLOS is a another beast (in a blog).
Respect that!!  (this not a flame as PCLOS member against UL)

JohnW57

John,

Why are you (a PCLOS person), coming here (the UL public mailing list) to complain that Thomas made a pre-release based on PCLOS? If anybody ever had a right to complain about it, we would, not you. We aren't complaining. We understand.

[JohnW57]

Hi Kaleb

I'm not complaining here, I give only a comment!
I have no problem with his PCLOS remaster!
He have all the right to do that.

I comment only he's using UL-developers to publish it as Qua It beta
(UL-branch based distro)

You said this is a public mailing list it gives me the right to make
comments.

Think it is (or was) a better idea he had published on the PCLOS
forum.

JohnW


On 3 nov, 21:13, Kaleb <djj...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Chris Evans]

---

From: JohnW57 <joh...@gmail.com>
To: ul-developers <ul-dev...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, November 3, 2011 6:41 PM
Subject: [ul-developers] Re: Quá ít 2012 beta

--
Those of us that have been involved in Unity for some time now, understand that we all use different stuff, go about things in different ways, especially considering how alot of distros handle things. we here at unity have always been about using whatever we need to, to get the job done. even if that means using another distro, or packages from somewhere else. hell, I'm using a remaster of a remaster of pclos zen mini done by dragynn. devnet was running linux mint for awhile there, we have users that love arch, we are all over the place. unity is a community of misfits, hackers and people that just don't really belong anywhere but here. if thomas wants to use pclos, I'm all for it. I thinnk we can all agree there never was a problem with pclos as a distro, it works great. the community though, well imo they suck ass lmao

[David Baum]

John,

It seems like PCLOS dev should put his nose everywhere:

1. Thomas has a right to publish his remaster even on MS forum, nobody and license can prohibit that, but only you put nose into the issue.
2. Everybody can do a remaster for any target and to publish it anywhere until there are any changes in the license and integrated some commercial products into a distro, but you put again your nose, claiming like you have not a right for that.
3. Two years ago, when Thomas was a part of SAMity Linux (former SAM Linux), you just moved to Phoenix Linux by saying to us: "Why are still developing the distro based on PCLOS? Your are not allowed to do" WTF? Again you put your nose, even though we were the first who made the PCLOS XFCE remaster.

I am coming from the world of the Web and Mobile development, I did some patches for NoSQL CouchDB and python-couchdb, that doesn't mean that i cannot publish them on GitHub.

So John, What is the problem here?

David Baum

[OnlyHuman]

Hi JohnW57, good to see you here, and thanks for your comments.

I would agree with Matthew Dawkins sentiment.

Though see it could be confusing for a user, whether it was based on
PCLinuxOS or Unity-linux, if that is where you are coming from.

As far as I aware unity is not at present hosting the iso, which if it
was could possibly cause a misunderstanding of what actually is the
base of the linux community remaster Quáít2012RC.

I hope I speak true in saying Unity is a friendly community, and that
Unity would like to work together with PCLinuxOS and Mandriva, with a
better relationship, which could benefit everyone
.
Best wishes,

OnlyHuman

[Kaleb]

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 6:41 PM, JohnW57 <joh...@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Kaleb

I'm not complaining here, I give only a comment!
I have no problem with his PCLOS remaster!
He have all the right to do that.

I comment only he's using UL-developers to publish it as Qua It beta
(UL-branch based distro)

You said this is a public mailing list it gives me the right to make
comments.

Think it is (or was) a better idea he had published on the PCLOS
forum.

JohnW

Ah, sorry I misunderstood. As Thomas eventually intends to return to a Unity base, don't you think many members of the PCLOS community would take an announcement like this as trolling and an attempt to steal users?

[David Baum]

Lol, Kaleb

Seems like that, Thomas is trolling and here is my troll face ;-))))))))

--

[Kaleb]

On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 8:44 AM, David Baum <serj...@gmail.com> wrote:

Lol, Kaleb

Seems like that, Thomas is trolling and here is my troll face ;-))))))))

David, Thomas has long been a respected member of this community. I think we understand that basing this pre-release off PCLOS is simply a temporary bridge until the repos get stable again.

[OnlyHuman]

Looking forward to the repo's being sorted soon, though surprised
Thomas never got an updated unity from Yogibaer, I have one that's
about 2 or 3 weeks old he could download, that still creates guest
account, if that would be any help, long as he keeps some files locked
in smart it should remaster ok, but hopefully stability will return
very soon.

[David Baum]

Kaleb,

My message was only the addition for your previous words, I understand and respect Thomas as I know him personally. I will repeat on my words again, he is has the right what he does, but seems like the pclos dev took that too close to the heart like trolling.

David

--

[JohnW57]

Hi!

I did give Thomas only a comment as seen on topic!
Nothing more, nothing less and not as a attack against Thomas or Unity
Linux.

Guess nobody did read this: http://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php/topic,95570.0.html
He did his full story on the PCLOS Forum!
Nothing is removed to TZ by the admins.

Had a good and nice chat with Matthew on IRC yesterday!

Also there is a difference between both distros, one as desktop and
one as core.
.Both share Linux.!!

For flaming or trolling is Distrowatch Weekly Comments a better way
( I hate it!!)

JohnW

On 4 nov, 13:25, Kaleb <djj...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Thomas Fröhlich]

2011/11/5 JohnW57 <joh...@gmail.com>

--

no problems, here, the thread of forum ? ... hmmmmm... ok i must write new... THANKS to OnlyHuman!!!!!  :)

Regards

[OnlyHuman]

Thanks for that forum link JohnW57,
good to see it looked a very friendly reception for onkelo.
Best wishes,
OnlyHuman

[Thomas Fröhlich]

2011/11/5 OnlyHuman <halo....@googlemail.com>

--

Today i give up, have probing to setup the iso from OH, that's work, but if i nstall the xfce-pkgs then the trouble begin;
not depended on the xfce-pkgs it self but on others,
next week i will probing a new and clean setup....

Regards

[OnlyHuman]

Hi Thomas,
you might find missing depencies on mandriva repos if you can discover
what you need, good luck.

[Thomas Fröhlich]

2011/11/12 OnlyHuman <halo....@googlemail.com>

Hi Thomas,
you might find missing depencies on mandriva repos if you can discover
what you need, good luck.

--

yes so is it, and now the installation will not more boot, ok , that i can not discover what i need is my fault,
i hope to rebuild it by a new setup ...

but now i have to do other things, in few days i can start twice