AROS Exec

General => General Chat => Topic started by: nikos on October 16, 2019, 04:02:25 PM

Title: The situation
Post by: nikos on October 16, 2019, 04:02:25 PM
Dear friends.

I'm a fan of everything Amiga related. Ever since I discovered AROS around 15 years ago I had big hopes for it.
Time move on and they way we deal with computing move on.
I learned a lot throuh the years about Amiga and alternatives.
I did a lot for AROS through the years. Donating Money, creating a distribution "www.aspireos.com", A lot of beta testing and reports.
I regret nothing. I learned a lot and had fun, but also been frustrating.

Since almost all OS developers left and there been very little activity the last years, I tought it could be a good idea to talk about AROS and a possible future.

My opinion at least for now is this.
AROS targeted to be an open source Amiga like OS for new, powerfull hardware but also for classic.
I would say as a NG system AROS failed. Not cause it is worse than alternatives. AmigaOS 4, MorphOS, AROS have all failed trying to compete, being an alternative to modern computing operative systems.

We know the Vampire team now support AROS 68k. First of all for legal reasons. I now think this is where AROS can have a life into the future.
The problem is that if nothing is done to continue AROS 68k there will probably be other alternatives that might leave AROS in the dust.

We all know the legal problems with Amiga 68k but it might be solved and Amiga OS classic is being worked on. Next version Amiga 3.2

Remember noone care about muliti core, memory protection etc. etc. for Amiga classic. We don't have that problem there. AROS 68k have so much going for it. We have free USB stack, free network solution, Zune etc. et. I hope people start compile software and improve the compatiblety to the classic Amiga OS.

AROS runs fast on Vampire and I would love to see native software like Zune Tools on it.

Amiga classic is where new original games are developed. All sceners that do demos and mods. use classic Amiga systems up to 060 as Reference. Look at www.pouet.net and you will see a lot of productions last years and still very much alive.

Glad to hear what you think about AROS and the future.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 16, 2019, 04:55:08 PM
@nikos

I agree that AROS 68k is one of the ways for AROS to continue to advance into the future. There is still much work to be done there. I'm willing to devote some time developing some alternate icon sets and themes for AROS 68k. I'd also like to start writing software with 68k resources in mind. So "if it runs on AROS 68k it will likely run everywhere".

I also think AROS 64bit is another way forward and it is making great progress recently. There isn't much software available yet for Icaros 64bit but that will change.

Another very promising and exciting way forward for AROS is support for ARM and Raspberry Pi. :-)

But I feel that you have touched upon something very important. For all Amiga-like operating systems the best way forward is to develop a spirit of cooperation rather than direct competition.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 07:23:55 AM
the game is not lost, I know that everyone is working for something, but everything cannot be stopped now even if we are just a few, I think there will be a 64-bit version and later with multi-core support, it is also working for the vampire, we can have available 4 GB of ram and support for stationary cards, all this does not exist in the other systems, we look at what we have and we go on, the programmers will not stop now and this is certain, between a I will install the new icaros when it is available :D
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: AMIGASYSTEM on October 17, 2019, 08:31:32 AM

I'd also like to start writing software with 68k resources in mind. So "if it runs on AROS 68k it will likely run everywhere".

No native AROS 68 k software does not work on Amiga Classic, the opposite is true
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: Yannick on October 17, 2019, 08:39:58 AM
After 10 years of wandering around Aros I'm not as optimistic.
Work on main repository is done to almost zero for months, ABIv1 is stalled.
Main developers have left or are working on their own forks (may be) and very few thinks are committed back to main trunk.
We're left with a few enthusiasts but with no or few developing skills (I'm counting myself into this category also) that will not bring Aros forward.

If core developers are not coming back, if no new skilled developers are joining, if ABIv1 is not finalizing in the next few months we will be left with what we have today, an OS without anyone behind to bring it further (same as OS3 in 1994).

I still like Aros and like developing for it (even if I judge myself not skilled enough to develop Aros itself).
I'm also really missing folks that were part of the community 4-5 years ago and were able to help new developers and were creating an emulation in the third party developer community.

Not very positive, but I think realistic...
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 10:49:50 AM
After 10 years of wandering around Aros I'm not as optimistic.
Work on main repository is done to almost zero for months, ABIv1 is stalled.
Main developers have left or are working on their own forks (may be) and very few thinks are committed back to main trunk.
We're left with a few enthusiasts but with no or few developing skills (I'm counting myself into this category also) that will not bring Aros forward.

If core developers are not coming back, if no new skilled developers are joining, if ABIv1 is not finalizing in the next few months we will be left with what we have today, an OS without anyone behind to bring it further (same as OS3 in 1994).

I still like Aros and like developing for it (even if I judge myself not skilled enough to develop Aros itself).
I'm also really missing folks that were part of the community 4-5 years ago and were able to help new developers and were creating an emulation in the third party developer community.

Not very positive, but I think realistic...

Yannick

I have great respect for you and there is much room for optimism. I'm using the picdt tools on a regular basis trying to improve the picture datatypes. Zune Tools are a big part of Icaros Desktop and keep up the good work.

You are skilled enough to develop for AROS. I'm in regular contact with the development team, yes there is a team and not just one or two. It's true there are few in number but their skills are mighty! Tremendous things are happening behind the scenes moving x64 forward. All new development is for 64bit.

Paolone has provided the first working version of Icaros Desktop 64bit. It doesn't have much software. We are waiting with anticipation for Zune Tools and others to be compiled for 64bit AROS. The Future is Now.

Some developers with great skill, much more than me, are assembling a new build system to make it much easier for new programmers to compile their software. You and others have the skills to be very helpful as well. The Apollo Team has expressed their support for AROS 68k development. The developer network is much frenzied with work on m68k which has been neglected for some time. I'm providing icon tools and making the first new alternate icon sets for AROS, one for 68k and a more sophisticated set for other distros.

Much tedious time consuming work is being done behind the scenes with new graphics drivers, an entirely reworked Wanderer that will be light years ahead of what we have. Work on a Raspberry Pi version is continuing and advancing rapidly but it takes much time.

Maybe AROS developers can follow the example provided by the Apollo Team. They are also few in number but their skills are mighty! Because software development takes much time and effort, on the surface it seems like not much is happening. So Apollo Team give regular status updates about current and planned development goals.

Maybe this is an impromptu status update. :-) Just because there haven't been many commits lately doesn't meen development has stopped. Kalamatee and others are working very hard. I am very impressed with the new Wanderer. It has a cool new logo and it rocks! So nice.

Yes. Good things are coming soon. ;-)
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: lm on October 17, 2019, 11:52:18 AM
Quote
...
 We are waiting with anticipation for Zune Tools and others to be compiled for 64bit AROS. The Future is Now.
...

Zune tools for 64bit aros are available here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/zunetools/files/x86_64/

Quote
...
I am very impressed with the new Wanderer. It has a cool new logo and it rocks! So nice.

Yes. Good things are coming soon. ;-)

Can you post a screen shot of the new Wanderer ?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: nikos on October 17, 2019, 12:54:01 PM
I tought things where exactly as Yannick described. Abi v.1 kind of killed the Project.

There was a time where AROS devs. where active at the forum and now it is like Hyperion if it is true
that things are being done.

I wish the OS devs. could show up here again. I don't understand why there are almost no commits to the night builds.
The build system got its stable branch so no worries to break anything there. We also have distributions for that.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 12:56:13 PM
Thank you. I'm sure Yannick mentioned that Zune Tools was being compiled for 64bit but maybe I missed that. I'll download the tools as soon as I can.

The Wanderer Update is Kalamatee's project. Since it is a Work-In-Progress I would have to ask him before posting any screenshots. But I don't think he would mind if I posted the Wanderer Logo to drum up some enthusiasm and support for the good work he is doing for AROS. Here is a screenshot of the new logo...

As for Wanderer maybe we could also adopt the saying from Tolkien as a new Motto: "All Those Who Wander Are Not Lost."

Although the new Wanderer will make my work look less difficult since initially I'm just porting DiskMaster2 to AROS, nonetheless DM2 has great potential. DiskMaster is one of my file managers that is a Work-In-Progress. It isn't as colorful as an Wanderer or Magellan Icon View but its simplistic Text-In-Lister Dual-Pane Display makes it attractive for minimalists like me. It is also very easy to configure...
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: Yannick on October 17, 2019, 01:04:24 PM
This new Wanderer thing is a never ending story, we are waiting for the commits to go to main repository for years now (http://www.aros.org/fr/news/archive/2009.php)

There has been many discussions and posts in old Aros-Exec about this and the fact is that current Wanderer isn't worked on or improved because a new Wanderer shall come soon.

Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 01:19:52 PM
I tought things where exactly as Yannick described. Abi v.1 kind of killed the Project.

There was a time where AROS devs. where active at the forum and now it is like Hyperion if it is true
that things are being done.

I wish the OS devs. could show up here again. I don't understand why there are almost no commits to the night builds.
The build system got its stable branch so no worries to break anything there. We also have distributions for that.

There is much work going on behind the scenes. Paolone is getting Icaros Desktop 2.3.0 finalized and he's also working very hard at compiling and assembling software as much as he can for Icaros Desktop 64bit which is coming soon. A few of us have it running as Hosted on Linux. The Native version may install but it doesn't currently boot from hard drive. I'm not sure if it's the same for others but I have lots of large and small projects I'm working on and I don't have much spare time for anything. I have updated the BMP Picture Datatype with new save functions and hopefully that will be included in Icaros 2.3.0 as well. I haven't made any commits either, yet. I'm not sure the old SVN system is still working. I believe everything is through Github now. That's where our sources come from.

Here's where my opinion comes in. If we use Microsoft or Apple as an example, Microsoft never abandoned 32bit while working on 64bit, neither did Apple. So why did AROS leadership decide that there would not be active development for ABIv0 because everyone is now working on ABIv1? That has never made any sense to me. When I first started with AROS programming maybe two years ago, I had great difficulty because of this arrangement. I was using Icaros Desktop which was 32bit. I was trying to update picture datatypes even then. But all work was being done for ABIv1 so I didn't have much choice. I didn't have a build system set up for 64bit nor did I have a way to test anything. I was trying to commit changes that would then be compiled with the Nightlies then download the result and test it. That lasted about two weeks before I just completely quit. So rather than write software for AROS and commit to the repository I went off on my own writing my own software for AROS which is mostly graphics programs. Recently the situation changed. I discovered GCC in the shell for Icaros 32bit and with Paolone's help and the help of other skilled developers I have managed to get a build system (cross-compiler) set up. I still intend to update picture datatypes with the code that I have developed over the last couple of years. That's another work-in-progress, and again nothing committed yet on that.

AROS 64bit and AROS 68k and AROS for Raspberry Pi are all currently being worked on. Things aren't going quickly because there aren't many people doing the work. But any help is appreciated if you know about programming. ;-)

As someone said recently and I'm in the same situation: "I'm just a Csharp programmer who is used to Visual Studio". I'm trying to program for AROS, but it ain't easy!
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: ilBarbax on October 17, 2019, 01:24:46 PM
Concerning Wanderer I don't like the window title reflecting the whole path of the window. It is also a duplicate of the path showed on the underneath text box.
I would put in the window title just the latest step of the path leaving the complete path in the text box.
I also do hope to have a button to switch between the different views and show icons/all
The top would be to have the possibility to add buttons to be link to specific dos/arex scripts.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 01:31:38 PM
This new Wanderer thing is a never ending story, we are waiting for the commits to go to main repository for years now (http://www.aros.org/fr/news/archive/2009.php)

There has been many discussions and posts in old Aros-Exec about this and the fact is that current Wanderer isn't worked on or improved because a new Wanderer shall come soon.

Ok. I accept that analysis. I'm relatively new to AROS programming. Some people have been around for a long time and have witnessed many things and many promises that weren't kept. If I have my way, I would assist with getting the new Wanderer up and running for AROS 64bit. I certainly have the desire to help. But I have a general lack of knowledge when it comes to C progrmming for AROS. That's a major obstacle for me, and besides I'm only one person. I can't do everything and be everywhere all at once. I have my own Ideas about how Wanderer should function and that we should be able to use other file managers. One of my ideas, and I'm not sure if it has gotten any attention, is to add a "green button" to the current Wanderer. Standard file requesters have a "parent" button and a "Volumes" button. Wanderer has a blue "parent" button but no green "volumes" button. Here's a screenshot of the buttons I painted as an example:

Adding a simple button would add a lot of functionality. I too have heard "It's not worth updating Wanderer. A new version is coming." Why wait. The current version can be updated incrementally if needed. I don't know how complex the inner workings of it are, but there are certainly some limitations with the current Wanderer. Just yesterday I noticed that Wanderer doesn't handle "unassociated icons" well. If you have some iff icons or png icons in a Wanderer window you can't copy them or delete them if no files are associated with the icons! But Magellan treats them as "files" so with Magellan you can copy or delete unassociated icons quite easily. But even Magellan has issues that I don't like. It's not possible in Name View to delete or copy an icon that is associated with a file without copying or deleting both the icon and the file. Why can't it be done independently? Just a few things I've noticed that I'm not entirely pleased with. :-(
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 01:56:32 PM
Concerning Wanderer I don't like the window title reflecting the whole path of the window. It is also a duplicate of the path showed on the underneath text box.
I would put in the window title just the latest step of the path leaving the complete path in the text box.
I also do hope to have a button to switch between the different views and show icons/all
The top would be to have the possibility to add buttons to be link to specific dos/arex scripts.


I have also noticed the window title behavior. That might require a little more planning and an update. I agree that it doesn't work quite the way it should.

I certainly like the idea of a "Views" button to swich easily between Name View and Icon View, and I also think there should be a third called "Tile View" which shows Image Thumbnails. I got that idea from Yannick's Picture Requester. Maybe a customizable user menu for Wanderer would allow adding links to dos/arexx scripts. There should be a Tools Menu for favorite apps, a Drawers Menu for favorite locations, and a User Menu for customizations. The added menus can be configured using a Prefs Utility similar to the old ToolManager for Amiga OS 3.x. (I also really like TurboText, but that's another matter).

As for the "Views" button this screenshot is from one of my Csharp programs called VDI Explorer which is a file manager for virtual disk images such as VDI for VirtualBox and VMDK for VMWare. It has a nice explorer type interface and a "views" button on the right side of the toolbar at the top.

Actually I just had a tought about the "views". It should be placed to the left of the blue "parent" button. Maybe a small round white button with two opposing black tringles inside. Wanderer knows which view mode is current. When the user clicks the button the view changes. I really like that idea!!
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: paolone on October 17, 2019, 03:19:57 PM
Actually I just had a tought about the "views". It should be placed to the left of the blue "parent" button. Maybe a small round white button with two opposing black tringles inside. Wanderer knows which view mode is current. When the user clicks the button the view changes. I really like that idea!!


Zune (and Amiga in general) has had a very useful gadget for this kind of jobs, Cycle Menus: just add one in the interface and you would end up with a nice alternative to your windows-ish button menu. Something like this (see attachment).[size=78%] [/size]
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 03:38:52 PM
Actually I just had a tought about the "views". It should be placed to the left of the blue "parent" button. Maybe a small round white button with two opposing black tringles inside. Wanderer knows which view mode is current. When the user clicks the button the view changes. I really like that idea!!


Zune (and Amiga in general) has had a very useful gadget for this kind of jobs, Cycle Menus: just add one in the interface and you would end up with a nice alternative to your windows-ish button menu. Something like this (see attachment).[size=78%] [/size]

paolone

Thanks for the idea. I did think about a cycle button but it's too big and not consistent with the glass "parent" button. I didn't intend to use a Windos-ish view menu button just that such a button is common. (That's funny though!). I was thinking of a simple glass button with an arrow like the arrow button shown in this sample. But instead of black it would be white or grey.

Although kalamatee is working on a revised Wanderer program maybe it would be good to update the current version incrementally to improve performance and add functionality. Maybe start by fixing the title and adjusting how it deals with icons and adding a green button. Why green? Well we already have a blue button and green is somewhat complimentary. A red button doesn't seem right for some reason.

Adding a button and fixing a title might be something a novice like me could handle. But then again it may end in disaster! ;-)

Yannick,
You might consider joining the Slack Channel where most of the AROS developers are. Currently there is a conversation about Scalos and the new build system. It's not that there's no ongoing development. It's just that you're listening in the wrong place. Your input and insight would be very helpful.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: Yannick on October 17, 2019, 04:22:39 PM
And how do I join a Slack channel talking about Aros when there is no indication anywhere about it's existence?
And what is coming out of the discussions there?
What is communicated to the outside world? highlights from November 2016 on AROS official page => 3 years without any news?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: walkero on October 17, 2019, 04:46:31 PM
That is a great discussion here. As an Amiga user for a long time, mainly of AmigaOS 4, I like the idea and the usage of Aros as well. Actually, in Aros there is a tiny contribution from my side, which is the Greek language and keyboards. I wish I could do more.

If you allow me, I would like to add my opinion on the discussion. First of all, I agree that competing Windows, MacOS and Linux is a no go for Icaros, but I like the idea of running it hosted. This is something that makes the running process even faster and great.

I believe that Aros could be a great OS for SoC ARM systems, especially because there are no equivalent Operating Systems there, especially if this could be really fast. Of course there is Debian and other Linux distribution, but I believe that Aros can beat them on speed.

Secondly, I would like to say that Aros needs more users as much as it needs more developers. Last weekend I was in Neuss of Germany at Amiga34 event. It was unfortunate that Aros was nowhere. Not a single machine was running it, not a single person talked about it. And that happens almost to every event. In a few days their is going to be Amiwest 2019. Are there going to be any presentations/updates on where Aros is and where it goes? Speak about how much active it is?

Aros needs to be communicated to people. More users will result more people talking about it, more people using it and it's software, less developers leaving it.

Thank you for your patience with my message.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 04:56:47 PM
And how do I join a Slack channel talking about Aros when there is no indication anywhere about it's existence?
And what is coming out of the discussions there?
What is communicated to the outside world? highlights from November 2016 on AROS official page => 3 years without any news?

They will need your email address. You can send it in a message. Then someone there can invite you to join.

If you really want to know about the Scalos Dicussion the basic understanding was that it currently does not work well for 32bit and it doesn't compile for 64bit. But the sources are maintained by the original author. Much of the discussion on a daily basis deals with the current build system, the new build system that is being developed now and programs that work or don't work with AROS 64bit.

If you are interested message me here with your email address and I'll forward it to one of the maintainers of the Slack Channel. When I first heard about it my response was similar. I said "Slack What? What's that? How do I join." One of the developers from the Amiga OS4 channel invited me. But AROS is there as well.

I'll voice your concern about a needed update on Aros-Exec to see if one of the main developers will have time to give an update.


 
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 07:50:43 PM
yes I didn't understand why to abandon abiv0 when there is no stable replacement project :-\
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: nikos on October 17, 2019, 08:16:31 PM
yes I didn't understand why to abandon abiv0 when there is no stable replacement project :-\

It was a mistake. The whole situation got kind of out of control. Deadwood backported commits to abi v.0 but some did not like that. Some ment that slowed down development of abi v.1 and wanted it abonded. It finaly  kind of happend but as you say Salvo. It should at least be a stable brach to replace it. Abi v.1 is still not a stable branch. If to reach its goal it must be broken again. Maybe many times. All software need to be recompiled. Its a mess.

Lack of plan and leadership always been a problem. To me the project seams dead.
It is only a few software devs. that release some stuff from time to time.

Miker1264: What is it about ScaleOS. It was nice 20 years ago. I don't get it.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 17, 2019, 08:30:43 PM
yes I didn't understand why to abandon abiv0 when there is no stable replacement project :-\

It was a mistake. The whole situation got kind of out of control. Deadwood backported commits to abi v.0 but some did not like that. Some ment that slowed down development of abi v.1 and wanted it abonded. It finaly  kind of happend but as you say Salvo. It should at least be a stable brach to replace it. Abi v.1 is still not a stable branch. If to reach its goal it must be broken again. Maybe many times. All software need to be recompiled. Its a mess.


FYI, since June I'm hosting a copy of AROS repository where ABI will not longer be broken and AROS itself expected to be stable. The supported build is linux hosted x86_64.

The repository is located here: https://github.com/deadw00d/AROS

If there are people interested in working on stable version that will not get their software broken every couple of months, this is the version to use.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 08:32:17 PM
yes I realized that the problem was abiv1, paolone maybe wants to update the abiv0 branch, I don't know, hopefully, at least in the meantime a stable branch will exist :-\
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 08:44:24 PM
thank you deadwood :D
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 08:49:04 PM
@salvo
actually im not in a position to comment on this, but from my private pov abi v0 is "feature complete" and can be used "as is" completely fine. its also fine when people are fixing it up or contributing to it, if they wish, and they do. personally, i was involved with v1 from the start since m68k is my main area of interest.

abi v1 has received a lot of updates in all areas, mainly for contemporary x64 and arm targets, but also m68k as legacy. these updates have been as far possible ported to v0 as well, mainly by deadwood. but its this is imho a bit of problematic, because even if it drags abi v0 along a while longer it also postpones the development and transition to abi v1.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: nikos on October 17, 2019, 08:54:15 PM
yes I didn't understand why to abandon abiv0 when there is no stable replacement project :-\

It was a mistake. The whole situation got kind of out of control. Deadwood backported commits to abi v.0 but some did not like that. Some ment that slowed down development of abi v.1 and wanted it abonded. It finaly  kind of happend but as you say Salvo. It should at least be a stable brach to replace it. Abi v.1 is still not a stable branch. If to reach its goal it must be broken again. Maybe many times. All software need to be recompiled. Its a mess.


FYI, since June I'm hosting a copy of AROS repository where ABI will not longer be broken and AROS itself expected to be stable. The supported build is linux hosted x86_64.

The repository is located here: https://github.com/deadw00d/AROS

If there are people interested in working on stable version that will not get their software broken every couple of months, this is the version to use.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

That is great Deadwood.
AROS64, Linux hosted is for sure a platform that can live.
I like the idea of having Linux with security, modern web-browser and run AROS for some games and apps.
Is there a version to try out that is compiled?
I don't feel comfortable compiling AROS64 myself.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 08:59:09 PM
@wawa

I understand in the end maybe maybe there is not as much enthusiasm as the previous years, it will go on as you can and we will wait as we have always done, meanwhile 32-bit icaros is functional despite there are no more updates in the subsystem, but we are in a transition phase, so we'll see when the first 64-bit icaros will be ready with all that is there (at least the software, I'm not talking about games)
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 09:04:23 PM
@deadwood the alternative branch is different from the one found sourceforge which dates back to May 2019
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 09:08:52 PM

FYI, since June I'm hosting a copy of AROS repository where ABI will not longer be broken and AROS itself expected to be stable. The supported build is linux hosted x86_64.


but why x64 then? all aros software out there except the binaries in ports in contribs is 32bit i386. i dont think it will work with x64? this is just another split/fork from abi v0 just without advantages abi v1 might introduce.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 09:11:11 PM

Lack of plan and leadership always been a problem.

okay, are you ready to subdue to a mighty leader right away?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 17, 2019, 09:12:17 PM
Dear friends.

I'm a fan of everything Amiga related. Ever since I discovered AROS around 15 years ago I had big hopes for it.
Time move on and they way we deal with computing move on.
I learned a lot throuh the years about Amiga and alternatives.
I did a lot for AROS through the years. Donating Money, creating a distribution "www.aspireos.com", A lot of beta testing and reports.
I regret nothing. I learned a lot and had fun, but also been frustrating.

Since almost all OS developers left and there been very little activity the last years, I tought it could be a good idea to talk about AROS and a possible future.

My opinion at least for now is this.
AROS targeted to be an open source Amiga like OS for new, powerfull hardware but also for classic.
I would say as a NG system AROS failed. Not cause it is worse than alternatives. AmigaOS 4, MorphOS, AROS have all failed trying to compete, being an alternative to modern computing operative systems.

We know the Vampire team now support AROS 68k. First of all for legal reasons. I now think this is where AROS can have a life into the future.
The problem is that if nothing is done to continue AROS 68k there will probably be other alternatives that might leave AROS in the dust.

We all know the legal problems with Amiga 68k but it might be solved and Amiga OS classic is being worked on. Next version Amiga 3.2

Remember noone care about muliti core, memory protection etc. etc. for Amiga classic. We don't have that problem there. AROS 68k have so much going for it. We have free USB stack, free network solution, Zune etc. et. I hope people start compile software and improve the compatiblety to the classic Amiga OS.

AROS runs fast on Vampire and I would love to see native software like Zune Tools on it.

Amiga classic is where new original games are developed. All sceners that do demos and mods. use classic Amiga systems up to 060 as Reference. Look at www.pouet.net and you will see a lot of productions last years and still very much alive.

Glad to hear what you think about AROS and the future.


There's been plenty going on with AROS.   As for how to talk about AROS's future I've seen a ton of these threads by people who don't commit code throughout the years.   Here's how non-developers can contribute.   Test, Financial support or, get others involved.   We as AROS users are one of the biggest issues with AROS.  We sit here and whine about what we want.  Then once it's contributed we never bother to test and give feedback.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 09:14:18 PM
btw. i have been asked to post here, that "that it’s possible to update the website via github if anyone’s up to the task".
the repository is
https://github.com/aros-development-team
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 17, 2019, 09:22:58 PM
(...) but its this is imho a bit of problematic, because even if it drags abi v0 along a while longer it also postpones the development and transition to abi v1.

Why do you think so?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 09:29:18 PM
deadwood I downloaded the alternative branch abiv0, I saw that it is more recent than the last available, sin for gallium
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 09:33:39 PM
@terminills

we are discussing why not keep a stable branch at the moment, instead of leaving it in limbo waiting for when the 64 bit time comes, it seems to me a sensible thing what I say :-\
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 09:34:09 PM
(...) but its this is imho a bit of problematic, because even if it drags abi v0 along a while longer it also postpones the development and transition to abi v1.

Why do you think so?

because resources that could be invested into abi v1 are being saturated by maintenance of abi v0, beyond what it was supposed to be. thats at least how i understand the situation.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 17, 2019, 09:36:32 PM
(...) but its this is imho a bit of problematic, because even if it drags abi v0 along a while longer it also postpones the development and transition to abi v1.

Why do you think so?

because resources that could be invested into abi v1 are being saturated by maintenance of abi v0, beyond what it was supposed to be. thats at least how i understand the situation.

That is general statement that might be true if we were a company with a budget, but what resources are you exactly reffering to in case of AROS?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 09:37:20 PM
@terminills

we are discussing why not keep a stable branch at the moment, instead of leaving it in limbo waiting for when the 64 bit time comes, it seems to me a sensible thing what I say :-\

who has taken a stable branch from you? has icaros i386 ceased to work? does anyone prevent people to compile for it? whats your problem??
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 17, 2019, 09:38:11 PM
deadwood I downloaded the alternative branch abiv0, I saw that it is more recent than the last available, sin for gallium

It should not be. In general alt-abiv0 is what I saved from old SVN before it went dark so it should be identical to latest build that for example Icaros is based off.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 09:38:49 PM
but what resources are you exactly reffering to in case of AROS?
not monetary resources of course. contributors. people like yourself.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 17, 2019, 09:40:47 PM
@terminills

we are discussing why not keep a stable branch at the moment, instead of leaving it in limbo waiting for when the 64 bit time comes, it seems to me a sensible thing what I say :-\


I know what's being discussed.  Here's why, unless it's opensource or the source is passed down.  It will possibly break once ABIv1 is completed anyway and get tossed and we'll be back at square one.  Also stable doesn't mean fixed.   So how do you fix AROS when application developers are writing workarounds for a "stable" branch and not working with the core developers to point out the bugs in AROS?   When I bought Finalwriter and watched its development.  I learned that application development helped in locating bugs in the OS itself.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 17, 2019, 09:45:14 PM
I understand ok, @wawa i thinked a new version of gallium to be applied and that's it :-X
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 17, 2019, 09:48:03 PM
but what resources are you exactly reffering to in case of AROS?
not monetary resources of course. contributors. people like yourself.

Sure, but then you assume that I would otherwise spend energy on working on ABIv1.

The argument about "slowing" ABIv1 "by keeping ABIv0 refreshed" keeps resurfacing.

The only "resource" that was expended on keeping ABIv0 refreshed was my time. All other contributions were actually backports from fixes done in "trunk" so nothing was lost or wasted.

Funny thing is that actually while doing the initial backport to ABIv0 I fixed numerous things that got broken in ABIv1 because it was never put into hands of users. So actually my working on backporting to ABIv0 contributed to ABIv1 even if I didn't plan for it.



Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 09:57:49 PM
@deadwood

im fully aware of the differences and that you are not dedicated to abi v1. but right now i think the code might have moved too far apart to back port stuff from v1.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 17, 2019, 10:01:44 PM
@wawa

Hmm, I don't understand your last comment. I was not talking about again rebasing ABIv0 on top of trunk.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 10:08:38 PM
no i wasnt implying that you should, just that the mutual advantage of having abiv0 and v1 simultaneously side by side might have expired.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 17, 2019, 10:10:45 PM
There's been plenty going on with AROS.   As for how to talk about AROS's future I've seen a ton of these threads by people who don't commit code throughout the years.
That's what you get when you believe contributing consist solely of comitting.

Even when you commit or offer your commits for review they are being ignored.

Quote
Here's how non-developers can contribute.   Test, Financial support or, get others involved.   
Been there, done that. It is not considered contributing and as a consequence not being taken serious at all.

Quote
We as AROS users are one of the biggest issues with AROS.  We sit here and whine about what we want.  Then once it's contributed we never bother to test and give feedback.
I've wasted years 'not contributing' to this project and the evidence is still there for those that wish to see it. Not seeing it is putting up your blindfolds.

As long as people are ignoring the truth about these things nothing will ever change.

It would be better to start acknowleding things so that things can be put in motion.

And to give you a starter: whatever happened to the paperclips that were mentioned but not being addressed ?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 17, 2019, 10:16:01 PM
@deadwood

im fully aware of the differences and that you are not dedicated to abi v1. but right now i think the code might have moved too far apart to back port stuff from v1.
Wholly f*ck.

Have you ever seen what deadw00d did to get 'his project' going. He's mantaining a complete list of changes between v0 and v1 and he spend at least 2 years on getting this shite into motion so that we could enjoy some of the fixes and/or new features that were added to v1.

deadw00d has always been very informative, helpful and open for suggestion on how things could become better for us as users (and 3th party developers).

If it wasn't for his 'backport' i would have quitted many moons ago (i know you most people prefer to don't see me at al anymore, but please keep spreading fud and i keep coming back :-) )
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 17, 2019, 10:18:03 PM
That's what you get when you believe contributing consist solely of comitting.

Even when you commit or offer your commits for review they are being ignored.
Quote
Been there, done that. It is not considered contributing and as a consequence not being taken serious at all.
  I can't say that I've not been taken serious and I'm mainly a financial contributor.

Quote
And to give you a starter: whatever happened to the paperclips that were mentioned but not being addressed ?

I'll stick to my financial contributions as I have no time for anything else currently.

P.S.

  Many developers have stated they got sick of wasting their time trying to appease users due to lack of feedback.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 10:20:50 PM
i think im not diminishing krzysztofs contributions, he also was babysitting me for a while when i started trying to compile odyssey, so i value him alright. just im not sure what fud am i spreading.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 10:34:20 PM
Wow! What a lively discussion!

I had no idea there were so many people interested in AROS. ;-)

It is important to keep interest in AROS going and to introduce people to it by whatever means.

Yes. Testing and reporting problems is part of the process. But we should not discourage anyone from contributing wherever and whenever they feel most comfortable.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 17, 2019, 10:41:36 PM
... just im not sure what fud am i spreading.
If you understood the consequences of your words:
Quote
im fully aware of the differences and that you are not dedicated to abi v1. but right now i think the code might have moved too far apart to back port stuff from v1.
That would imply that the work deadw00d put into his list of changes between the abi's (and how to fix certain hickups when you backport) has no meaning at all (at least not to you anymore, as you imply).

fwiw: icaros is based upon this works for many moons now. That also means that if it wasn't for the backport that icaros would have been on hold for several years now. (if you count back from today).

I'm not implying it is still possible to maintain the backport(although deadw00d himself made his comments about that so you can decide for yourself) but taken another remark from your hands:

Quote
actually im not in a position to comment on this, but from my private pov abi v0 is "feature complete" and can be used "as is" completely fine. its also fine when people are fixing it up or contributing to it, if they wish, and they do. personally, i was involved with v1 from the start since m68k is my main area of interest.
of course you are entitled to your own pov, but imo it is wrong. As a devloper of 3th party application i can tell/proof your wrong on many occasions. The situation woul;d have been much worse if the backport wouldn't exist.

To make sure i write it again: current icaros is based on this work and new versions of icaros (whether you consider it a good or bad things that new v0 AROS distro versions are distributed or not) can only exist because of that.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 17, 2019, 10:57:31 PM
It's good to discuss important matters. But discussing the merits of ABIv0 or ABIv1 won't change much. AROS 64bit needs software. So start building and making and compiling! That will change things.

AROS has many things going for it that are very attractive. It can run on many different platforms as native or hosted. AROS Hosted on Linux works REALLY WELL. The only other OS hosted on Linux Is Mac OS X. That works well too. Darwin is Linux.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: nikos on October 17, 2019, 11:17:19 PM
There are things broken in AROS64. Maybe Deadwood will fix it. I guess he don't want to spend all his time to fix others bugs. I think he is kind of finished with that. Just like Neil seams to be. That is maybe why he got his stable branch. He is the only of the main Devs. that show up here.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 17, 2019, 11:58:51 PM
ok. afair, at some point the developers consensus has decided that there is going to be abi v1 in particular in order to close tha gap of the source compatibility with the genuine amiga os, that abi v0 has left open. work has been put into this, introducing new platforms such as m68k along the way, which was actually part of the pursuit, because it allowed cross testing behaviour of the binaries with the platform of reference.

i think, this has not only influenced low level parts of the system but also userland such as mui/zune. i remember a lot of issues with that back in the day when for instance afaos was designed and differences in behaviour of mui and zune have made special zune versions necessary at times. many apps are dont work right on zune to this day, but it has definitely improved.

now, i understand that part of improvements gone into that effort, because of its duration, have been, for the time being, interim so to say, made available for the public of a stable while obsolete declared abi platform.

i also understand that some developers have become weary of the slow progress and tend to re-declare the obsolete abi v0 valid target and rather try to gather an application pool around it.

but then, why to introduce a binary incompatible platform as a base for that. where is the advantage?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 18, 2019, 01:31:41 AM
@wawa
Finally a more constructive post from your hand. Thank you for that, although there seem to be some misconception. fwiw: a misconception that was explained on the old aros-exec forums many times.

let me start by writing that
1. this is as far as my recollection goes. It might be wrong, in which case feel free to correct me.
2. i'm generalizing which does not imply i'm addressing individuals.


Quote
ok. afair, at some point the developers consensus has decided that there is going to be abi v1 in particular in order to close tha gap of the source compatibility with the genuine amiga os, that abi v0 has left open. work has been put into this, introducing new platforms such as m68k along the way, which was actually part of the pursuit, because it allowed cross testing behaviour of the binaries with the platform of reference.

There once was a project named AROS which aimed to be(come) a reimplementation of the amiga OS. Progress was made, milestones reached and the project grew (and had a lot of discussions of what would be the correct way to continue).

At a certain point in time it was decided to make it as api compatible as possible, so that old sources could simply be recompiled and run on AROS

In that period it was the believe that whatever AROS tried it would become (almost) impossible to ever make it binary compatible with amiga 68k. One of the main restrictions being the kickstart (how to ever fit AROS kernel in there).

So development went on and api compatibility was not so strict back then (why bother factor). Whenever there was a better way to implement things it was implemented that way (neverminding the api compatibility let alone abi compatibility).

Of course this causes problems being source-compatible so api compatibility was becoming a more serious issue. Things were fixed to overcome that.

Winding forward fast there was one certain individual who said: shite on that, i want AROS to be binary compatible as well. And so he did.

But right before that point (regular) AROS was both abi and api incompatible to 68k amiga. The only way to solve was to create a new abi and 'break' things. Better clean up things (add incompatibilities between abi's) and so it went.

One problem remained and that was that in those days there was a distro and software base for the existing api/abi rendering it incompatible with whatever changes where necessary for Jason to reach his goal.

So things began to split (further) between abi's.

On one hand you need your userbase to have proper feedback/advertisement and on the other hand you want to move on as quickly as possible in order to reach certain goals.


Quote
i think, this has not only influenced low level parts of the system but also userland such as mui/zune. i remember a lot of issues with that back in the day when for instance afaos was designed and differences in behaviour of mui and zune have made special zune versions necessary at times. many apps are dont work right on zune to this day, but it has definitely improved.
It has improved but it is still not compatible. never mind the newer versions, which opens another can of worms.

Quote
now, i understand that part of improvements gone into that effort, because of its duration, have been, for the time being, interim so to say, made available for the public of a stable while obsolete declared abi platform.
Only certain individuals declared it obsolete. If you truly use AROS as your daily driver and develop for it then you can see the incompatibilities and inconsistencies. They are still there.

Quote
i also understand that some developers have become weary of the slow progress and tend to re-declare the obsolete abi v0 valid target and rather try to gather an application pool around it.
Also here only certain individiuals have made it as such.

Picture a whole userbase who enjoy AROS (using old abi) and people using software, running into bugs and reporting them. They are the users that enable a developer to receive (meaningful) feedback about their progress (at least in case a developer is interrested in receiving such feedback).

Quote
but then, why to introduce a binary incompatible platform as a base for that. where is the advantage?
Exactly. Why would you introduce a new abi and add all kind of (new) features that weren't part of the original definition of the OS to begin with ?

Because it is fun, and it is the R in AROS.

And to contrary believe i do support going v1 and 64 bit asap. Unfortunately for me, that ship has sailed many moons ago (*).

The practice is that it is unstable (abi/api changes) so not interresting for me as 3th party developer, many (old) flaws that (still) also exist in v0 that aren't addressed and new features are introduced that are buggy (comes with the territory) and we are still talking about the same missing features.

what i would have expected (ignorant me) is a (proper) round-up for v0 and leave it at that. Fix things when reported and when possible and keep it stable. That leaves room for v1 and 64-bit to mature in its own space and time (and also learn from the reported issues of the old ABI and make things better).

imho better would be to swith to v1 abi (also for v0) and start a new branch for all new features like smp and whatever. That way you would have a 'stable' versions that is api/abi compatible to 68k and in case new features are required (for example because new hardware like vampire can only be supported by such support) could then be backported to the 'stable' branch.

It would allow for the existing software base to exists (without the need for recompilation) and be extended when necessary.

imo that is what deadw00d is/was trying to accomplish with his backport as much as possible, albeit using a different naming scheme and skipping a step/branch.

So, imo your post tells thing a bit in a topsy turvy manner  :)

(*) i used to use AROS in a 24/7 environment using my own custom build and own custom software. So i could not afford to recompile my entire software base over and over again and get blocked by (missing and/or changed) features. Since then i've migrated because it was becoming obvious to me that things were going into a dead end street.

Although i tend to agree with miker1264 that discussing the merits of v0 and v1 does not matter much. It is simple: if you do not care for your existing software to run anymore then it is pretty easy to be happy with using v1. Otherwise you are more or less condemned to use an old(er) abi.

Officially killing off the old abi (or preferring one over the other) isn't going to change that for a bit. What does matter though (and imho) is the way you handle that and how you treat your userbase. Keep in mind that my software has its own userbase for which i'm accountable.

I would say, travel back in time and become a MacOS user so you can experience that feeling fully at first hand.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 18, 2019, 01:55:43 AM
from what i remember when m68k target was introduced and jason and toni picked up the task, which was when i got into aros, it was a general consensus that this task is approved and it should have been completed earlier, except there were no skilled developers to be found till then. in my eyes that means that abi v1 has been declared a valid target, but well, i have not red the dev ml prior to that.

nevertheless i dont remember that much of disagreement what concerns the way forward, but then i might be wrong. certainly though i didnt have an impression that it was just a single persons initiative.

Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 18, 2019, 02:22:17 AM
from what i remember when m68k target was introduced and jason and toni picked up the task, which was when i got into aros, it was a general consensus that this task is approved and it should have been completed earlier, except there were no skilled developers to be found till then. in my eyes that means that abi v1 has been declared a valid target, but well, i have not red the dev ml prior to that.

nevertheless i dont remember that much of disagreement what concerns the way forward, but then i might be wrong. certainly though i didnt have an impression that it was just a single persons initiative.

AROS 68k is a worthwhile effort and there will be a growing demand for that software as the userbase for 68k increases.

But AROS itself hasn't been a one-man project, as far as I know. When I got my build system to work and AROS compiled for the first time, not long ago, I remember watching the text scroll by on the screen. Yes, I'm easily amused by such things! ;-)

As I sat there watching it building I thought to myself how grateful I was at all the tremendous effort over the years that has become AROS. There is still much to be done. But I'm still very grateful for everyone who has contributed to AROS and for all those that continue to do so on a regular basis.

Thank you to everyone that has contributed to this wonderful thing called AROS.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 18, 2019, 02:36:17 AM
from what i remember when m68k target was introduced and jason and toni picked up the task, which was when i got into aros,
You might be correct in that shortly prior to Jason's work the 68k target was been taken more serious and the abi split went shortly before that. It can be checked from the commit history (which i was too lazy to do).

Quote
it was a general consensus that this task is approved and it should have been completed earlier, except there were no skilled developers to be found till then. in my eyes that means that abi v1 has been declared a valid target, but well, i have not red the dev ml prior to that.
I seem to remember something similar in that a) there wasn't enough manpower even back then and b) especially the kickstart fitting magic would require someone with enough time and mindset to be able to accomplish the task. I vividly remember the drive that Jason had to be able to get AROS booting on his classic hw.

At that time Toni could also only do what he could (given his other projects)

Quote
nevertheless i dont remember that much of disagreement what concerns the way forward, but then i might be wrong. certainly though i didnt have an impression that it was just a single persons initiative.
The events after that show that there was not a general consensus. But that is from my point of view. After this hapened there was a little time of euforia, then ARIX... i seems to remember Anubis being mentioned again, the backport branch, much (heated) arguments both on forums and irc to finally end up at github.

Just check the commit history and prior arguments on the ml to see for yourself if there is concensus or not. Unless something changed there simply isn't any (or at least there isn't any proof of that). Oh, and i almost forgot the final insult being slack.

Again and unfortunately this does not change anything to the current situation and still presents us with the dilemma as mentioned before.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 18, 2019, 03:34:53 AM
@wawa
Finally a more constructive post from your hand. Thank you for that, although there seem to be some misconception. fwiw: a misconception that was explained on the old aros-exec forums many times.

let me start by writing that
1. this is as far as my recollection goes. It might be wrong, in which case feel free to correct me.
2. i'm generalizing which does not imply i'm addressing individuals.


Quote
ok. afair, at some point the developers consensus has decided that there is going to be abi v1 in particular in order to close tha gap of the source compatibility with the genuine amiga os, that abi v0 has left open. work has been put into this, introducing new platforms such as m68k along the way, which was actually part of the pursuit, because it allowed cross testing behaviour of the binaries with the platform of reference.

There once was a project named AROS which aimed to be(come) a reimplementation of the amiga OS. Progress was made, milestones reached and the project grew (and had a lot of discussions of what would be the correct way to continue).

At a certain point in time it was decided to make it as api compatible as possible, so that old sources could simply be recompiled and run on AROS

In that period it was the believe that whatever AROS tried it would become (almost) impossible to ever make it binary compatible with amiga 68k. One of the main restrictions being the kickstart (how to ever fit AROS kernel in there).

So development went on and api compatibility was not so strict back then (why bother factor). Whenever there was a better way to implement things it was implemented that way (neverminding the api compatibility let alone abi compatibility).

Of course this causes problems being source-compatible so api compatibility was becoming a more serious issue. Things were fixed to overcome that.

Winding forward fast there was one certain individual who said: shite on that, i want AROS to be binary compatible as well. And so he did.

But right before that point (regular) AROS was both abi and api incompatible to 68k amiga. The only way to solve was to create a new abi and 'break' things. Better clean up things (add incompatibilities between abi's) and so it went.

One problem remained and that was that in those days there was a distro and software base for the existing api/abi rendering it incompatible with whatever changes where necessary for Jason to reach his goal.

So things began to split (further) between abi's.

On one hand you need your userbase to have proper feedback/advertisement and on the other hand you want to move on as quickly as possible in order to reach certain goals.


Quote
i think, this has not only influenced low level parts of the system but also userland such as mui/zune. i remember a lot of issues with that back in the day when for instance afaos was designed and differences in behaviour of mui and zune have made special zune versions necessary at times. many apps are dont work right on zune to this day, but it has definitely improved.
It has improved but it is still not compatible. never mind the newer versions, which opens another can of worms.

Quote
now, i understand that part of improvements gone into that effort, because of its duration, have been, for the time being, interim so to say, made available for the public of a stable while obsolete declared abi platform.
Only certain individuals declared it obsolete. If you truly use AROS as your daily driver and develop for it then you can see the incompatibilities and inconsistencies. They are still there.

Quote
i also understand that some developers have become weary of the slow progress and tend to re-declare the obsolete abi v0 valid target and rather try to gather an application pool around it.
Also here only certain individiuals have made it as such.

Picture a whole userbase who enjoy AROS (using old abi) and people using software, running into bugs and reporting them. They are the users that enable a developer to receive (meaningful) feedback about their progress (at least in case a developer is interrested in receiving such feedback).

Quote
but then, why to introduce a binary incompatible platform as a base for that. where is the advantage?
Exactly. Why would you introduce a new abi and add all kind of (new) features that weren't part of the original definition of the OS to begin with ?

Because it is fun, and it is the R in AROS.

And to contrary believe i do support going v1 and 64 bit asap. Unfortunately for me, that ship has sailed many moons ago (*).

The practice is that it is unstable (abi/api changes) so not interresting for me as 3th party developer, many (old) flaws that (still) also exist in v0 that aren't addressed and new features are introduced that are buggy (comes with the territory) and we are still talking about the same missing features.

what i would have expected (ignorant me) is a (proper) round-up for v0 and leave it at that. Fix things when reported and when possible and keep it stable. That leaves room for v1 and 64-bit to mature in its own space and time (and also learn from the reported issues of the old ABI and make things better).

imho better would be to swith to v1 abi (also for v0) and start a new branch for all new features like smp and whatever. That way you would have a 'stable' versions that is api/abi compatible to 68k and in case new features are required (for example because new hardware like vampire can only be supported by such support) could then be backported to the 'stable' branch.

It would allow for the existing software base to exists (without the need for recompilation) and be extended when necessary.

imo that is what deadw00d is/was trying to accomplish with his backport as much as possible, albeit using a different naming scheme and skipping a step/branch.

So, imo your post tells thing a bit in a topsy turvy manner  :)

(*) i used to use AROS in a 24/7 environment using my own custom build and own custom software. So i could not afford to recompile my entire software base over and over again and get blocked by (missing and/or changed) features. Since then i've migrated because it was becoming obvious to me that things were going into a dead end street.

Although i tend to agree with miker1264 that discussing the merits of v0 and v1 does not matter much. It is simple: if you do not care for your existing software to run anymore then it is pretty easy to be happy with using v1. Otherwise you are more or less condemned to use an old(er) abi.

Officially killing off the old abi (or preferring one over the other) isn't going to change that for a bit. What does matter though (and imho) is the way you handle that and how you treat your userbase. Keep in mind that my software has its own userbase for which i'm accountable.

I would say, travel back in time and become a MacOS user so you can experience that feeling fully at first hand.

afair the 68K branch was a stale branch when the ABI split happened.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 18, 2019, 03:56:23 AM
afair the 68K branch was a stale branch when the ABI split happened.
Thank you Terminills.

Commit history seems to support that statement and would explain me being incorrect that it did not exist before (there simply seem to have not been any movement for a long time).

Please consider me corrected with regards to that point: There was a 68k branch just not very active until Jason and toni came along (of course with support/prior work from other developers as well).
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 18, 2019, 07:53:09 AM
But AROS itself hasn't been a one-man project, as far as I know.
That is correct. Although if you look at the commits you could get the impression it sometimes was (at least in some area's and/ or during some periods).

Quote
When I got my build system to work and AROS compiled for the first time, not long ago, I remember watching the text scroll by on the screen. Yes, I'm easily amused by such things! ;-)
I do believe that most of current build system improvements are to thank because of Kalamatee and his persistance/efforts (can't tell for sure if it was all his work but at least they are his commits).
Quote
As I sat there watching it building I thought to myself how grateful I was at all the tremendous effort over the years that has become AROS. There is still much to be done. But I'm still very grateful for everyone who has contributed to AROS and for all those that continue to do so on a regular basis.
I had the same experience when i started the gimmearos script for the first time and then started building AROS.

I agree that it is a great thing to see the build system in action and producing something that at times is able to resemble something of an OS  :)

Quote
Thank you to everyone that has contributed to this wonderful thing called AROS.
I seconth that.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: x-vision on October 18, 2019, 08:46:23 AM
but what resources are you exactly reffering to in case of AROS?
not monetary resources of course. contributors. people like yourself.

Sure, but then you assume that I would otherwise spend energy on working on ABIv1.

The argument about "slowing" ABIv1 "by keeping ABIv0 refreshed" keeps resurfacing.

The only "resource" that was expended on keeping ABIv0 refreshed was my time. All other contributions were actually backports from fixes done in "trunk" so nothing was lost or wasted.

Funny thing is that actually while doing the initial backport to ABIv0 I fixed numerous things that got broken in ABIv1 because it was never put into hands of users. So actually my working on backporting to ABIv0 contributed to ABIv1 even if I didn't plan for it.

Why don't you wanna work on abi1? I am innocently asking, excuse my ignorance but I don't don't know the entire AROS history
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 09:49:02 AM
I did not understand the situation well, only that dedwood did some important work only because icaros exists, and then all my thanks, I will wait for the next release 2.3.0 which introduces new innovations that are always welcomed at least from my side, what the future will be, you will see, I know that you are working on the 64-bit version I can do and support programmers within the limits of my possibilities :D
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 18, 2019, 01:09:15 PM
There's been plenty going on with AROS.   As for how to talk about AROS's future I've seen a ton of these threads by people who don't commit code throughout the years.
That's what you get when you believe contributing consist solely of comitting.

Even when you commit or offer your commits for review they are being ignored.

Quote
Here's how non-developers can contribute.   Test, Financial support or, get others involved.   
Been there, done that. It is not considered contributing and as a consequence not being taken serious at all.

Quote
We as AROS users are one of the biggest issues with AROS.  We sit here and whine about what we want.  Then once it's contributed we never bother to test and give feedback.
I've wasted years 'not contributing' to this project and the evidence is still there for those that wish to see it. Not seeing it is putting up your blindfolds.

As long as people are ignoring the truth about these things nothing will ever change.

It would be better to start acknowleding things so that things can be put in motion.

And to give you a starter: whatever happened to the paperclips that were mentioned but not being addressed ?


Final note on this.   I can tell you I've spent over $20,000 on Final Writer and I've literally almost cancelled it multiple times due to lack of interest and feedback.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: OlafS3 on October 18, 2019, 01:53:26 PM
@terminills

Feedback for something that does not yet exist?

There were a lot of threads where people expressed interest
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 02:15:27 PM
when davy wenzel brought his program audioevolution we made a donation for it, if yours is ready we could do the same thing :-\
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: OlafS3 on October 18, 2019, 02:25:38 PM
afair the 68K branch was a stale branch when the ABI split happened.
Thank you Terminills.

Commit history seems to support that statement and would explain me being incorrect that it did not exist before (there simply seem to have not been any movement for a long time).

Please consider me corrected with regards to that point: There was a 68k branch just not very active until Jason and toni came along (of course with support/prior work from other developers as well).

That is one of the problems... the aros devs do what they want not what users want

In best case it is both the same but in reality there is a split

On one hand partly extremly sophisticated components on the other hand not a stable bugrfree advanced environment and then of course no fully supported hardware. People boot it, it not works like they know it, it crashes and they cannot get important components working. Then they give up and go away and tell everyone how bad Aros is (and that even years after)
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 18, 2019, 02:31:15 PM
@terminills

Feedback for something that does not yet exist?

There were a lot of threads where people expressed interest

When I sent a copy to Paolo for inclusion in Icaros I got next to zero feedback.  So yes it existed.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 18, 2019, 02:35:45 PM
when davy wenzel brought his program audioevolution we made a donation for it, if yours is ready we could do the same thing :-\


Donations?   I don't need donations obviously as I will flat out say it now I'm probably the largest financial supporter of AROS in the sum of $300+ a month.    What I needed were bug reports.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 03:18:52 PM
paolo can't give you bug reports with its prerelease for programmers
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 03:20:50 PM
I can buy a copy and give you reports is the only application I know how to use, I did a word course many years ago :-\
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 18, 2019, 03:42:36 PM
paolo can't give you bug reports with its prerelease for programmers


It wasn't for programmers.   It was merely a prerelease for users to try and give feedback.

However it's been moving along in spite of the lack of feedback thanks to the developers working on it. :)

(https://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/73120116_2314174128846302_7254806452844363776_n.png?_nc_cat=106&_nc_oc=AQnbYxkIT_d-FzPuQhOQ8zbMNZF7JkslE4UZbv6s_c6Agu-MLndEMc-ZVscxcU-F2TbZR1AOmpjm3uELuQ0TN-xF&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&oh=a22555a2a43d3ca4c8b44fac4a472040&oe=5E5D67B1)
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: OlafS3 on October 18, 2019, 03:58:26 PM
Is it a demo version with f.e. saving disabled?

If there is a working version for Aros 68k I could do a little test distribution with it included. Everyone has UAE but most not Icaros. Or I could integrate a demo version in my distribution. I will upload new versions next week.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: paolone on October 18, 2019, 04:35:22 PM
Final note on this.   I can tell you I've spent over $20,000 on Final Writer and I've literally almost cancelled it multiple times due to lack of interest and feedback.


I wonder how you may recoup all these money. You'd need 200 users paying $100 each or, more realistically, 400 users paying $50. You must release it for all platforms to get this result.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 04:42:53 PM
meanwhile we start with the sale by aros here, who wants a copy or two you book, we open a special thread :-\
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 04:48:42 PM
for me the thing is positive and maybe not only for me we paid 2000 euros for audio evolution, maybe it would take an effort of us all for terminills
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 04:58:42 PM
@terminills

the program is finished?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 18, 2019, 05:12:52 PM
from what i remember when m68k target was introduced and jason and toni picked up the task, which was when i got into aros,
You might be correct in that shortly prior to Jason's work the 68k target was been taken more serious and the abi split went shortly before that. It can be checked from the commit history (which i was too lazy to do).


The history is a bit different.

ABIv1 was planned for x86 (32-bit) and was being worked on by Staf on separate branches for several years prior to moving it to trunk. Then two things happened:

a) AROS was growing fast and amount of changes made to it were causing Staf's branches to have conflicts all the time and Staf spending time on resolving the conflicts instead of working in ABIv1
b) m68k target of Jason needed the change in several APIs and LVO locations which Jason was still trying to do without impacting compatibility, which meant workarounds

In order to help both topics, the decision was made to "break" trunk. This was Staf's codes could move from branch to trunk and Jason could make all the binary compatibility changes also without need for workarounds. I think at that time the developer community was fairly uniform in supporting that move (including me to some degree) or was not voicing concern.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 18, 2019, 05:22:39 PM
Final note on this.   I can tell you I've spent over $20,000 on Final Writer and I've literally almost cancelled it multiple times due to lack of interest and feedback.


I wonder how you may recoup all these money. You'd need 200 users paying $100 each or, more realistically, 400 users paying $50. You must release it for all platforms to get this result.

I never expect to recoup my money tbh.  Sure it would be great but in all actuality, it is more of a gift to the community.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 18, 2019, 05:32:48 PM
Why don't you wanna work on abi1? I am innocently asking, excuse my ignorance but I don't don't know the entire AROS history

I'll answer this as well as similar question from @wawa.

The reason is that by now, seing what I have seen, I have no belief that ABIv1 will ever be finished.

With that in mind I had a few options:
a) wait some more for a mirracle
b) forgot about the whole thing
c) take what is already there and decide that it is good enough for me and others who have similar view and move forward

I was "waiting some more" for a few years, tried twice to persuade to have a change in direction and then I finally just decided to take another route.

Believe me, I would be extremly happy to be proven wrong with my initial statement. The last thing I need is maitaining a parallel repository and backporting changes from the main one and several satelite ones. Seing an annoucement AROS in main repository is now stable and backwards compatible and devs will obey by this, would be a great thing to experience.

Also please be aware that you only keep listening to my view of the topic. To make a ballanced opinion for yourself you need to listen also to people who hold a different view.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: terminills on October 18, 2019, 05:36:01 PM
for me the thing is positive and maybe not only for me we paid 2000 euros for audio evolution, maybe it would take an effort of us all for terminills

I'm fine financially.  I was merely pointing out that the lack of proper input is an issue in the AROS community.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 18, 2019, 05:53:08 PM
@deadwood maybe a miracle will happen then, @terminills ok thank you
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: paolone on October 19, 2019, 12:35:26 AM
I was "waiting some more" for a few years, tried twice to persuade to have a change in direction and then I finally just decided to take another route.

Believe me, I would be extremly happy to be proven wrong with my initial statement. The last thing I need is maitaining a parallel repository and backporting changes from the main one and several satelite ones. Seing an annoucement AROS in main repository is now stable and backwards compatible and devs will obey by this, would be a great thing to experience.
I see there is life in AROS repository, but at the moment I pragmatically consider the whole x86-64 version "too raw" and also too much 'regressed' for final users: no 3rd party software, no sound, no 3D drivers, even programs in contrib fail to work. That's why I stick with ABIv0 i386 version for the mainstream version of Icaros Desktop. But I believe this:
1. some day or another, ABIv0 AROS will be utter obsolete. There won't be anyone willing to use less than 2 cores or 4 GB of RAM. Cheap hard drives have terabyte of space and we can use only 128 GB partitions (even less: if you get too near to this barrier, your filesystem will fail soon). Moreover, the last person working on it was you. After you 'left', the only improvement to the system has been the VMware SVGA driver, which is still incomplete and lacks all the 3D acceleration stuff. How many chances there are I can continue with this system codebase in the future? Unless anyone provides a new backport, it will starve as it is now.
2. There is a time when you have to look forward. I am not killing ABIv0, but AROS users are. Our userbase has ever been composed by a few people actually using the system everyday, and a vast majority just updating Icaros to see what's new. In particular on the social networks, I've received many vocal requests about moving to ABIv1 x64, I've been even accused of keeping the OS development "stopped" for many years just because I didn't choose to move to ABIv1 i386, as if Icaros had all this power. There was also some interest by Nikos to create a 64bit AspireOS (interest that - as far as I can see - has fallen a lot afterwards), but AROS x64 can't even boot from the hard drive once installed, and I guess this put him off, really. I chose to insist, because problems are here to be resolved, bugs to be fixed, and so on. I sincerely want a 64bit version of Icaros, in the hope it will help AROS grow like the 32bit version did 10 years ago. I know it won't happen with the same pace, but I still hope it will happen.
3. "The last thing I need is maitaining a parallel repository and backporting changes from the main one and several satelite ones": that's exactly what I am afraid of, when I see forks or potential forks of the main repo. Today we have your x64 flavour and Kalamatee's one: I am quite sure programs compiled for one will fail on the other. And if this does not happen today, it will happen tomorrow. Just imagine me, trying to make a distribution, with half the 3rd party programs working for a flavour and the other half for the other (BTW: this is the exact situation I got with current few programs released on the Archives for x86-64 AROS. NONE OF THEM WORKS on main repo's system). I would get mad in no time. We already have a stable branch and it is i386 ABIv0. Let's keep the others work in progress, but as unified/coherent as possible, and try to enhance/fix this one. The last thing we need is more fragmentation.

4. I am trying to push development on AROS and for AROS as much as I can, trying to convince newcomers into using the AROS build system as a 'standard' environment. The more our build chain is standardised and automated, the faster and the easier recompiling will be, if something in the ABI changes. That's the scope of my VM, but there are interesting efforts on Docker as well from other people. I am also trying to evangelize the open source model as much as I can. You were working on a great instrument for development too: has it progressed?

Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 19, 2019, 02:11:54 AM
The good news is that AROS 64bit which also means Icaros x86-64 is headed in the right direction. We are getting more people involved that are interested in programming and trying to prioritize what needs to be done at a minimum for AROS x64. So far we are focused on Scalos, Wanderer, Dopus. Others are focused on Docker. AROS 68k is also a priority and hopefully sometime soon someone will address the 64bit boot issues. There are just so many things to get done.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 19, 2019, 10:05:20 AM
3. "The last thing I need is maitaining a parallel repository and backporting changes from the main one and several satelite ones": that's exactly what I am afraid of, when I see forks or potential forks of the main repo. Today we have your x64 flavour and Kalamatee's one: I am quite sure programs compiled for one will fail on the other. And if this does not happen today, it will happen tomorrow. Just imagine me, trying to make a distribution, with half the 3rd party programs working for a flavour and the other half for the other (BTW: this is the exact situation I got with current few programs released on the Archives for x86-64 AROS. NONE OF THEM WORKS on main repo's system). I would get mad in no time. We already have a stable branch and it is i386 ABIv0. Let's keep the others work in progress, but as unified/coherent as possible, and try to enhance/fix this one. The last thing we need is more fragmentation.

Once upon a time there was a symbiosis between two groups of developers which allowed AROS to grow and flourish. First group was interested in major advancements that changed the landscape. As they did those advancements, they inherently broke a lot of other stuff. Second group was interested in more gradual changes and were often fixing what get broken when making major advancements. From that symbiosis, while they often argued with each other, both groups got what they needed: first got enjoyment from experimentation and advance, second got enjoyment from seeing the advancements being brought to user base and actually being used by people.

What held that symbiosis together however was a simple covenenant: "Though shall not break backward compatibility". Regardless of how many bugs were introduced, as long as this one thing was kept in place, there was continuity.

This changed in 2011 (yes, it is 8 years already), when the mantra became: "This is development version, we can break what we want when we want, it is not intendent for the users (or more radical versions of the same)". With this, both groups drifted apart.

I believe AROS will not grow again without this symbiosis being in place and this symbiosis will not happen without the covenant being brought back. What I did in my fork, I brough back that covenant. Time will tell whether it was the right approach.


You were working on a great instrument for development too: has it progressed?

It did not during summer. I spent energy on some outdoor activities I came to enjoy in recent years. The winter is coming however, so we shall see ;)
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: OlafS3 on October 19, 2019, 10:15:06 AM
@deadwood

yes that is how I see it too

Aros became pure "research" but not really "replacement"

Users do not care about advanced USB support as long the whole system is not stable and there are bugs that make normal use impossible. The system must run stable and (as far as possible) bug free, it must be easy to install and hardware must be supported. As long this is not the case most users will drop it immediately

My idea (being no OS developer of course) concentrate on hosted versions regarding X86/X64 (Windows, Mac, Linux) with full support of the underlying OS (sound, USB, 3D, Network) and on V4 (68k) and RPi (ARM) native (because hardware is relative static)
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: phoenixkonsole on October 19, 2019, 11:36:57 AM
Well .. aros hosted / Wanderer is the ui of around 6000 sold Odroids XU4 in 2018/19

Problem: people don’t care if it is aros or any other os as long the devices do what they shall ..

Just saying that aros has by far the largest distribution base .. but completely wrong audience : )

The audience we are looking for doesn’t seem to exist anymore in today’s world.

(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/464899697337827332/616663478052192269/blueboxad.png)
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: phoenixkonsole on October 19, 2019, 11:50:13 AM
Next thing with completely wrong audience is the Bluephone .. just a China  oem phone with Aeros + android .. ~ not Amiga focused but it is aros hosted „powered“

(https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/464899697337827332/624639410042044416/bluephone.png)

So users are not equal to userbase : )
But to recap:
All the transcendence projects lead to a shipload of work / payment possibilities.
My idea last year was to have aros being a piece of the construct to get funding..

So market ? Check and marked as solved
Funding? Checked and marked as solved

Now we need a foundation to move money form a to b ..
we experimented with https://governance.rocks to create a voting but also funding platform..

Title: Re: The situation
Post by: deadwood on October 19, 2019, 12:23:41 PM
@phoenixkonsole

I'm not sure I understand. You are telling me there are commercial ARM based devices out there shipped with linux-hosted + Wanderer as their main UI?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: phoenixkonsole on October 19, 2019, 12:39:34 PM
Lol .. yes this was what i tried to tell you

Edit:
Just to add sie ring to the painting „the situation“

The problems of funding or market building can be taken out of the consideration.

We just need to bring the horsepower on the street and we need to define the destination where we (devs) want to go ..

I am more the consumer / crypto guy lately.

Don’t expect broadway being updated.
Paolo should be supported being the one maintaining the one and only distro (next to those having fun to create an own one).

I am Amiga fan .. you all too i believe..
the question is what are we aiming for ?
Convincing others about AROS as operating system is mega impossible ..
Bam .

Using it and delivering it as a solution for „usecases“ is absolutely possible.

I proved it. But it’s not about the spirit of the os as users don’t care .. they care about UI and UX if at all ..

So the Situation is more a question about who does what and where is everyone heading to ? Destination / goal ?

I need to talk to power2people about crypto acceptance .. the idea of passive income Bla bla : ) it works
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: ntromans on October 19, 2019, 02:08:11 PM
@deadwood

yes that is how I see it too

Aros became pure "research" but not really "replacement"

Users do not care about advanced USB support as long the whole system is not stable and there are bugs that make normal use impossible. The system must run stable and (as far as possible) bug free, it must be easy to install and hardware must be supported. As long this is not the case most users will drop it immediately

My idea (being no OS developer of course) concentrate on hosted versions regarding X86/X64 (Windows, Mac, Linux) with full support of the underlying OS (sound, USB, 3D, Network) and on V4 (68k) and RPi (ARM) native (because hardware is relative static)

Absolutely - as you say, relatively static hardware gives the best chance of success. What about this as a scenario?

- For those of us that like to run native, support one modern, barebones, relaively cheep and easily available x64 motherboard with plenty of PCIx express slots to add supported sound, network and graphics cards.

- For people who just want to use their current x64 machine, the options would be VM or hosted under Linux.

- For portable AROS, RPi 4 with AROS ARM native and one of the many kits for making it into a tablet or laptop.

- If possible (I appreciate USB is a problem here), AROS native on Pi 0 for embedded applications, hobby electronics and tinkering.*

- For the retro/gamer crowd, AROS 68k on Vampire.

Of course, the 'holy grail' for this is that all run the same API, so (within hardware limitations) one source-code file can be compiled for any of these targets Of course, as to how technically possible this is I am totally unqualified to say; it's just my musings.

Cheers,
Nigel.

*I still think there's a big opportunity for AROS to shine in this area. I'm currently setting up our annual Halloween haunted house full of animatronics triggered by various sensors, all controlled by AROS via Hollywood.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 19, 2019, 02:31:59 PM
@deadwood

yes that is how I see it too

Aros became pure "research" but not really "replacement"

Users do not care about advanced USB support as long the whole system is not stable and there are bugs that make normal use impossible. The system must run stable and (as far as possible) bug free, it must be easy to install and hardware must be supported. As long this is not the case most users will drop it immediately

My idea (being no OS developer of course) concentrate on hosted versions regarding X86/X64 (Windows, Mac, Linux) with full support of the underlying OS (sound, USB, 3D, Network) and on V4 (68k) and RPi (ARM) native (because hardware is relative static)

I have to say I also agree with the fact that AROS has one foot in the past, one foot in the present with an eye towards the future! Yes, it has its roots in the Amiga operating system. But it is also trying to be a more modern operating system by taking on modern features. And it has to be able to continue to grow.

But none of that really matters if each version isn't backwards compatible and stable enough to use. If you implement something new and break something else, then fix it immediately! It doesn't make sense to work on a version that is knowingly broken in certain areas. It may have been "research" at the beginning but now it's "implementation".

That's what's happening now, trying to fix what's broken to provide a stable foundation to build upon. This even more important when making the jump from 32bit to 64bit because much of what worked on 32bit doesn't work on 64bit. So it has to be fixed. But if it never really worked before, it may need to be completely reworked. That's a lot of extra work.

I agree also that there are certain areas where AROS can grow and become much better. Hosted is a very promising way to go, especially Hosted on Linux. Perhaps over time AROS will become more integrated with Linux to the point where Linux supports the hardware and AROS becomes the desktop. So when you start up your system, kinda like Mac OS X, you don't really see Linux. You just see AROS loading. Then it opens to Wanderer. But Linux is still there and you can still run Linux Apps and use Linux tools. Hosted is the way forward with PC hardware. But there should be support for AROS Native.

As far as hardware, AROS 68k is growing and improving because there is an increased demand for it to support modern accelerators. ARM support is also very promising and has the potential to reach a much larger group of users when it all works.

AROS had modest beginnings, but now it needs a way forward and skilled programmers who are devoted to its success.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: miker1264 on October 19, 2019, 02:47:51 PM
In the area of tablets and smartphones that may someday use a flavor or AROS hosted on a Linux base here's a concept:

Long shadow, flat icons for AROS tablets.

It can be an IFF Icon with as few as 8 colors. Or it could be a full color 32bit PNG Icon.

The cocept of AROS running Hosted on Linux is slightly different than AROS running "integrated" with Linux. Where Linux goes, AROS goes when integrated. When Linux runs on ARM so does AROS. Here is an example:

https://www.unix.com/android/145159-android-linux-java.html
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: paolone on October 19, 2019, 07:00:59 PM
Well .. aros hosted / Wanderer is the ui of around 6000 sold Odroids XU4 in 2018/19
Problem: people don’t care if it is aros or any other os as long the devices do what they shall ..
Just saying that aros has by far the largest distribution base .. but completely wrong audience : )
LOL! So it happens that AROS currentl has twice the userbase of AmigaOS 4. You shall tell that to people on aw.net. :D
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: x-vision on October 20, 2019, 02:11:03 PM
Well .. aros hosted / Wanderer is the ui of around 6000 sold Odroids XU4 in 2018/19
Problem: people don’t care if it is aros or any other os as long the devices do what they shall ..
Just saying that aros has by far the largest distribution base .. but completely wrong audience : )
LOL! So it happens that AROS currentl has twice the userbase of AmigaOS 4. You shall tell that to people on aw.net. :D

Would you support it, and not accuse him of being "very harsh"? ;) that would be an improvement
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 20, 2019, 02:25:58 PM
but power2people is active? :-\
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: phoenixkonsole on October 20, 2019, 04:28:00 PM
I have been last time in touch around June with ASiegel because he did the OS Logos for the transcendence Project (scroll down) the idea is also to rename Amicloud to transcendence cloud and make it open. And last time i saw him on AW.net posting in the thread about 64Bit Amigas.

I will email him as my "wish" would be to implement TELOS in P2P (that is the coin we started in june) can be easily accepted by using this: https://cryptocurrencycheckout.com

As we create a sort of basic income /passively we can enable amigans that way to donate without even touching their own pockets.
I have collected a bag of 3 Mio TELOS to share with Amigans. I am just waiting 2-3 month to announce it.

EDIT:
I see they listed us https://cryptocurrencycheckout.com/coin/transcendence
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: paolone on October 20, 2019, 04:44:08 PM
Would you support it, and not accuse him of being "very harsh"? ;) that would be an improvement
what?
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: ASiegel on October 23, 2019, 11:20:29 AM
but power2people is active? :-\
It is.

Paypal blocked the account used for donations for an extended period of time but this has been addressed.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: salvo on October 23, 2019, 03:05:03 PM
thank's
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: wawa on October 24, 2019, 07:29:32 PM
Concerning Wanderer I don't like the window title reflecting the whole path of the window. It is also a duplicate of the path showed on the underneath text box.

i agree, but it isnt a bug and you can disable the toolbar. it doesnt pay to fix up wanderer too much if kalamatee delivers his update soon.
Title: Re: The situation
Post by: magorium on October 30, 2019, 09:11:12 AM
The history is a bit different.
Thank you for the correction deadwood.

I completely forgot to incorporate the relevant part about Staf's work. It simply slipped my mind, sorry for that.

Quote
I think at that time the developer community was fairly uniform in supporting that move (including me to some degree) or was not voicing concern.
Just to make sure that i wrote not different: It was after that (when things settled down a bit after celebrating/enjoying the work done) that things did go a bit haywire.

If not the case then please feel free to correct. But whatever the case, we (unfortunately) are where we are today.

btw: good to see you (back) again, if even for correcting my dumb ramblings.