Some of us had this conversation a while back and I wanted to bring it up again on the list.
MS-DOS was a small operating system. MS_DOS 5 and 6 fit on a few 1.44MB floppy disks. We always intended FreeDOS to not just *replace* but *enhance* DOS. FreeDOS is "MS-DOS plus more." To make clear what's part of the "core" of FreeDOS, we have the "Base" package group. These packages replicate the behavior and functionality of MS-DOS. But we also have a lot of other packages that add new functionality to FreeDOS, and we put these programs in other package groups like "Editors" (additional editors) and "Devel" (compilers, assemblers, and other development tools). Over time, FreeDOS has grown to include lots of interesting programs. The FreeDOS 1.2 and 1.3RCx distributions are very big. As we look to the next FreeDOS 1.3 Release Candidate, I think we should consider removing some packages from the FreeDOS distribution. To be clear: I am not suggesting deleting packages or programs from the FreeDOS archive at ibiblio. There's lots of useful and interesting programs there. But I don't think we need to include everything in the FreeDOS *distribution*. Here are my thoughts from the FreeDOS 1.3 package list (wiki) <http://wiki.freedos.org/wiki/index.php/Releases/1.3/Packages> *Base* Keep everything *Archivers* Do we really need all of those archivers? For example, who needs Zoo these days? My suggestions: 1. Move bz2, gzip, and tar to the "Unix" group - these are replicas of Unix tools 2. Keep zip, unzip, p7zip 3. Remove the other packages: 7zdec, arj, cabext, lpq1, lzip, lzma, lzop, zoo *Note that p7zip can unpack a ton of other file formats, so we don't need these other archivers anyway. *Boot Tools* *I don't have any strong feelings here. What are your thoughts? *Development* Can we pare down the list a bit? We have a lot of packages here, but I don't think we need them all. For example, we should include the tools we know we'll need to compile the different FreeDOS utilities. I'd also like to keep the GCC related packages, and other packages that remain popular. My suggestions: 1. Move perl to the "Unix" group 2. Keep BWBasic, the DJGPP packages, FASM, the FBC packages (FreeBASIC Compiler) fpc (FreePascal compiler), the GCC-IA16 packages, JWASM, NASM, OW (OpenWatcom C Compiler), and UPX 3. Remove bcc (Bruce's C Compiler), euphoria, insight, lua, regina, runtime *I think I missed some packages in that list. I don't have a good opinion on those. What do you think? *Editors* Not sure about these. I know there are a few here I'd like to keep: Blocek, Elvis, FED, Freemacs, MSEDIT, pico, Vim *I don't have a good opinion on the other editors in the list. Which ones do you think need to stay? *Emulators* I don't think that these are useful to include in the full distribution. These all fall in the general category of "games," anyway. I'd recommend we eliminate the entire "Emulators" package group. *Games* I generally feel that we can add and remove games in the FreeDOS distribution on a whim. If a game is interesting and open source, we can include it. When a game stops being interesting, or doesn't interest a lot of people, we can remove it. *I really enjoy Wing and a few others. I don't have strong opinions on the other games. What are your thoughts? *Graphical Desktop* We added GUIs a long time ago when people were still doing active development on OpenGEM, oZone, and Seal. If you've been part of the discussion for a long time, you also remember we included a few other graphical menus and things that have since fallen out of the distribution. I think it's time to look at these GUIs too. My recommendations: 1. PC-GEOS was released as open source software. I haven't followed it, but last I checked, they weren't able to compile it (missing libraries, I think - requires some rewrites?) *If they can get this to compile*, I think we can include it. *If they still can't compile it*, then do not include it. 2. Remove SEAL and oZone. These haven't been worked on for a long time, and they are still incomplete 3. Keep OpenGEM. It's not under active development, but it's currently pretty solid, if plain looking *Networking* I don't run FreeDOS with a network, so I don't have any opinions on these packages. What do you think? *Sound* I know OpenCP and MPlayer both work fine, because I demo'd them in a YouTube video. I don't have any opinions otherwise. *Unix* The wiki page lists a few packages to remove based on duplicates or license concerns. 1. Move bz2, gzip, and tar from "Archivers" to "Unix" 2. Move perl from "Devel" to "Unix" *Utilities* We have a mix of things in this package group. I think some of these were interesting long ago, but probably aren't used anymore and can be deleted. My recommendations: 1. Keep aefdisk, ansimat, bootfix, callver, cdrcache, cdrom2ui clamav + clamdb, cpied, cwsdpmi, dialog, dn2, dog, dos32a, dosutil, doszip + dzemm, fdimples + fdisrc, fdnpkg, fdshield, fdtui, foxcalc, foxtype, gcdrom, gnuchcp + gnufonts, hexcomp, localize, lptdrv, memteste, ntfs, pcisleep, pdtree, pg, rcal, rdisk, search, setlock, shareext, shsufdrv, slowdown, spool, srdisk, stamp, switchar, udvd2, uhdd, uide, unrtf, usbdos, utf8tocp, V8power, wcd, wde, xdel, xfdisk, xkeyb, xmgr 2. Remove b64, blwcbc, bmp2png, bsum, daa2iso, edict, fdshell, finddisk, flashrom, gifsicle, hip, hiram, pgme, pngcrush, sqlite, terminal, topspin, wptail, zdir, zerofill *We have both doslfn and lfndos, but do we need both? Is one better (more complete) than the other? **If I missed any of Jack's utilities, that's an oversight from me. I would want to keep them. ***I skipped some packages in that list. I don't have a good opinion on those. What do you think?
_______________________________________________ Freedos-devel mailing list Freedos-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freedos-devel
