The Control Panel

[konaexpress]

Yea, it is kinda big. I am doing this on a 24 inch screen. If I figure this out, I will shrink it down. Sorry!

-John

EDIT: Do these things scale? Or do I change my screen name to "Wing Nut"?

[curaga]

That's quite different to the existing one, I don't recall seeing Bluetooth or Accounts around

[roberts]

Duh bluetooth is not in the base!
From  the beginning, icons were to be kept to a minimum as they only contribute bloat!
Only wbar has a few system icons, and the system supports boot code of noicons. Icons are NOT required. To each their own. I prefer frugally funcational over icon bloat.

[konaexpress]

That's quite different to the existing one, I don't recall seeing Bluetooth or Accounts around

No, Bluetooth and accounts are not in the CP. I was just screwing around to see if I could do it and get the hang of Fluid. 

Duh bluetooth is not in the base!
From  the beginning, icons were to be kept to a minimum as they only contribute bloat!
Only wbar has a few system icons, and the system supports boot code of noicons. Icons are NOT required. To each their own. I prefer frugally funcational over icon bloat.

That is cool, I will scrap the CP idea.  I will find something else to bang on.

[curaga]

If you want to make an user-friendly control panel, with a bluetooth helper included for example, we'd gladly accept it as an extension.

[Rich]

Hi konaexpress
As has been pointed out before, Tinycore is a toolkit that provides a basic system that you can customize to
your own personal needs and taste. Whether you are trying to customize your control panel or just trying to
learn how things work, you benefit either way. If icons is what you want, you can find a lot of them in
gnome-icon-theme.tcz  under  usr/local/share/icons/gnome. As far as bloat goes, while roberts aims for
minimum and some distros aim for maximum. you might feel there's a happy median somewhere in
between, so feel free to play.
 

[roberts]

If you want to make an user-friendly control panel, with a bluetooth helper included for example, we'd gladly accept it as an extension.

We have a policy to not allow overwiriting of base system functions. As that would make the system impossible to document let alone support.

[konaexpress]

It's all good guys, I'm not going do do anything to dork-up your distro.

I was just trying to help out. I guess I didn't get the full idea behind TC and what it is about.  TC is a cool distro and I plan on hanging on to it, so like I said, I will find something to do.

Keep up the great work you are doing.

-John

[vinnie]

Code: [Select]

We have a policy to not allow overwiriting of base system functions. As that would make the system impossible to document let alone support.
is not too excessive?
basically an extension that gives a graphical alternative to the tool could make happy the moles like me.

you do not like to make her happy?

[roberts]

@vinnie
If you cannot agree with the design principles of Core, then why use it?
From the beginning small size, quick booting, dynamic extensions, built on a solid base of a functionally frugal GUI with package management. To suggest that the base be expanded or overwritten for "user friendly icons" is to not agree with the foundations that make Core unique. If icons throughout the system is your requirement then I would suggest that you peruse some of 700+ other distributions as reported by Distrowatch.

[konaexpress]

ouch!

[vinnie]

I would agree with you if we were talking about replacing the gui in the base distribution, but i hypotized in an "alternative".

Following your argument anything in repository replace a base feature tool is no good, for example any docbar should be out of play due to the fact that we have wbar.

For the rest, hope you're not angry with me because I noticed a bit of resentment in your words (but maybe I'm wrong).

[solorin]

Very contented user/?extension packager? for about a year. 3.6 or so I think. Thanks and appreciation for everyone's hard work which makes Core suck less.

My journey was Tinycore->Microcore->Core. And I will very contentedly continue to use Core  how it is now and conceivably into the future.  I am in general enthusiastic agreement with Core's principles. And I understand it takes a certain willingness to say no to things in order to produce something in accord to those principles.

A distribution has a balance of qualities - off the top of my head - flexibility(across use cases, hardware, setup), size efficiency, speed efficiency, extendability, user-friendliness(to beginner, intermediate, expert), and community-openness(support). Sometimes, of course tradeoffs must be made between them. I am not interested in marketing Core/Tinycore/Coreplus, but if I was I'd examine these qualities and the continually changing environment in which they are being presented and make those tradeoffs accordingly.

All this to simply say, my statements are suggestions and not criticisms, and if these points have been considered and thought about already, chock this post up to forum noise. I am not interested in any negativity, only in fun, freedom-loving, and functional software/UX's/DX's(developer experiences).

I suppose there might be lingering confusion about what is actually considered "base".  One of the three ISO's being offered is ostensibly labeled Core, which would lead most people to believe that this provides all the base functionality. But earlier in this thread, "a frugally functional GUI" is asserted as part of "a solid base".  So which one is it? Is the Core team focused on the Tinycore iso or the Core iso as the base? Again, I don't have a dog in this fight. I'm just pointing out that this will lead to subtle differences in design priorities, usage patterns, and developer actions.

The second question that comes to mind pertains to community openness. It seems to me that the OP is motivated by a positive and enthusiastic desire to help improve Core.  To what extent are the current Core developers willing to support or collaborate with people like him?

This control panel for example:  Some of the press about this distro does mention aesthetics as a barrier to wider adoption. What if the OP managed to make a cpanel that was just as functional and frugal, if not more frugal, but slightly prettier? As it is currently, say he packages that up as the extension cpanel**.tcz, for all practical purposes, users who want to use that extension would have to install it alongside the current cpanel. Thereby duplicating functionality, resulting in 'bloat' for them.  This leads to the deliberation of the first point, the result of which would determine what use cases are best served by this distro.

tl;dr
I very much admire the OP's creativity, energy and enthusiasm, I'm not sure I'm a big fan of his aesthetic taste.

cheerio everyone,
solorin

[hiro]

Too long didn't read

[bmarkus]

Thanks and appreciation for everyone's hard work which makes Core suck less.

Nice starting. You are missing the basics of TC as well as press you are quiting:

Some of the press about this distro does mention aesthetics as a barrier to wider adoption

TC is not a generic distro like UBUNTU, MANDRIVE, SuSe, ... If TC sucks, forget it, it is not for you. There are plenty of others to play with.