Stable version having E16?

Not sure if that's a question but "api" is an alias for "apt-get install" on Elive.
Type "alias" to see all that are available. Just shortcuts :smiley_cat:

2 Likes

Very interesting! I thought api was a standalone package manager!

Thanks!

1 Like

alias | grep apt

:slight_smile:

2 Likes

Im rereading and i dont know what the heck i meant :confused:
Not sure why I didn't finish the sentence. Sorry

1 Like

As a final note I consider that the beta version which already includes a well integrated e16 can be perfectly be used as a stable version with e16 :slight_smile: (and yes, stable in bold)

3 Likes

Definitively, I think could be nice if we have Elive released with E16, like a subdistro / subversion of Elive

In other words: to not go away with a deprecated Buster and/or E16, could be good to save it as a snapshoted OS forever :slight_smile:

Question will be: simply a version of Elive in the downloads menu? Or like a subproject in a different website ? (this would require much more work).

I propose E16 as free version where E24 (when available) asks for a small donation.

Well, I don't really plan to ask for donations for the E16 version, but by other side I don't think that the e16 version can be a "demo" of the e24 one...

yes and not :thinking:

  • yes: it is more limited, so yeah it can be a "you want more? donate for the new one"
  • no: it doesn't offers the full elive experience so user cannot know "what is more", in other words, it will be a limited experience to show the elive goodnesses

I think this needs to be discussed ASAP, because:

  • debian is going to move out to the next stable release (buster -> bullseye), this means that if we move out we will have "all this work for nothing"
  • as said before, it will be good to have a "snapshoted" state of this very good work, named "stable release"
  • there's e16 lovers in the world, it will be the unique distro to support officially e16, and the way to give that good e16 to them

now the problem is, we cannot call it "4.0 stable release" because is not the same complete elive experience... the only options are:

  • to create an extra page in the download section named "E16 version" on which uses the e16 desktop... but what about the name and the version number?
  • another option is to create a sub-distro of it, "eliveretro" maybe lol, the downside is that this will require a different website and many extra work :thinking:

I suspect that will never be the case considering the slow pace of E24/enlightenment compared to the pace Debian is developing at currently.
I propose:

  1. Name E16/Buster as Release Candidate indeed for EliveSlimE16-2.0 or such i.e stay away from "retro"
  2. Continue 3.9 with Bullseye and E24 Beta .... methinks (now, after a few months of sole usage) that E24 is stable enough to use.

What about just have both?

Have a separate page in the pages.

keeps it simple (jst one page) while making a new distro.

Yes, we should immediately make a snapshot using e16, as like a "beta stable" lmao, or a "filler stable" or "substitute stable" or something...This is discussed ASAP so...@Thanatermesis do you have any @mentions to do?

Well, it seems to use at least ~500MB of RAM, maybe e16 can be considered "light stable" for worse PCs...

I know, it took them like a year (if you look at the copyright info) to just have an improved screenshot tool and less RAM usage, if you look at my python-text-calculator repo it takes me like two weeks for a release, these releases contain much work, and they only take a bit of time...

yes bad comparison but bear with me :teddy_bear:

Nah, that's comparing carrots to pineapples. :mwahaha:

1 Like

noted :work:

hum... this is a hard idea, so:

  • switching to bullseye is a good amount of work, but mostly: it will introduce a pretty good amount of bugs "to discover" (meaning time + work)
  • E24 port for elive is a much bigger work, i would say 10 times more than the previous line lol
  • in such case, naming it 3.9 could be an error (we can have only 99 releases after 3.9.00), so 3.9 is meant to be "release candidates" and not "fully experimental scenario" lol

Another option is to release the number 4.0 with the buster/e16 version (not a bad idea after all) but not calling it "stable elive release" but instead a "special version" (yes, special version 4.0 lol), and the stable version should still point to the old 3.0 version while working on the 4.x.xx very-alpha e24 :thinking:

maybe, the worst that can happen is that people would "talk" (debate) about that :thinking: , i dont think it can be a bad thing if the stable version clearly still points to the 3.0 version which is meant to be "another thing"

yeah i think it must be done ASAP, and since all the other options (like a sub-distro of elive) means too much work, i think that just a "special version" can be the best option, and like said previously, maybe using the number 4.0

not really, they are pretty similar :slight_smile: which means that e24 is really well optimized (much more featured and powerful than e16 but same light)

dont be confused, the development is really strong and fast, but their announcements are few and slow (they are doing much better now in fact), and also E itself doesn't receive so much changes (thats true), the biggest development is focused on their libraries in fact

why cant there be 3.9.100?

NO! DO NOT MIX THE TWO VERSIONS, YOU SAID YOURSELF THAT THEY ARE TWO SEPARATE VERSIONS

Ok, im done shouting. But they are two different experiences, it would be stupid to call unpolished e16 "stable 4.0", and then call a completely different version 4.1 or something.

:-1:

Really? E16 only seems to use ~250MB...thats half of e2*

tho i havent used e2* in a while...maybe it's less :thinking: :thinking:

that makes sense, the more programs the more publicity! :1up:

because many things (lots of elive tools inside the system, outside the system, etc) depends on this numbering structure, adding another value can lead to y2k effect :slight_smile: similar to the website, its made to expect these numbers... well, in fact it may (or not) work, but since its not tested, i dont want to risk to change the structure, if i change the structure, i will need to make a look and/or adapt many tools

ok hum... what you would suggest instead as a number for it?
basically the 3, 4, 5 mean a "final" (or stable) release... independently of what includes, the actual buster builds are very worked and stable and everythings acts & works as expected, so it will be good to mark it in some way "stable" system

but yeah, i agree with your point too :slight_smile: , the issue is how we should number it then? maybe '3.9.01 stable' ? :thinking:

no not really, actually you can install elive beta versions ending with an usage in between 200 or 550 mb or ram (yes, we are talking about e16), that depends if you are using the 32bit or 64bit version, but also what are your custom options in the installer, you can lead to a very light system. Then in that system you install e24 and you will see that the usage is no more than around 60MB more than e16

lmao

Something different than the current beta (3.x -> 4.0)

Could be confusing -- i.e. what's the difference between 4.0 and 3.9.01?

Ah, didnt know the lightweight was that light.

I assume that Debian is going to be moving out by Christmas, so... Bump

(mentions: @Thanatermesis, @triantares, @rbrick49)

How about roman numerals? :man_shrugging:

Hello and welcome to the forum! :1up: Love your name :smiley14:

I'm not sure what you mean there, can you elaborate? Do you mean having the version numbers for the special E16 version as Roman numerals (i.e. I, II, III, IV, V, VI, etc)?