ABIv1 vs ABIv11 and ABIv0, Branches, Upstream, Downstream, and other related items: AROS FORUMS

ABIv1 vs ABIv11 and ABIv0, Branches, Upstream, Downstream, and other related items

Last updated on 1 hour ago

AROS

development

Track thread Print

OlafSchMember

Posted 1 hour ago

#20

arosbeginner wrote:

@arosbeginner - I read this interesting discussion and I believe everyone is passionate about aros.

Constructively, we can achieve something better, and the question, without any intention of starting a row, is: Terminills, what do you propose for this abiv0, v1, and v11 situation? Perhaps now is the time to create a single workspace with deadwood?

As a beginner, what's stopping abiv11 from merging into abiv1?

I also think we should open a discussion about the license, because I think it's a shame that the Apollo OS updates haven't been uploaded to the Aros Development Team GitHub, or at least that's what I think.

I also think other updates on the A600GS deserve sharing, if, as it seems, Aros is 90% up and running.

Thanks for sharing.

The ApolloOS fixes partly were integrated with Deadwood and then propably also on main branch. At that time I did not follow main branch that carefully so cannot remember. I cannot judge if all ApolloOS commits are public available of course. One problem is, ApolloOS is pure dedicated to Apollo hardware so they made bigger changes to Aros, partly even cutting existing functionality. By far not everything can be applied to Aros. If you think a fix is missing then you could report it in bugtracker with link to it. I am pretty sure Kalamatee would at least look at it.

terminillsMember

Posted 1 hour ago

#19

arosbeginner wrote:

@arosbeginner - I read this interesting discussion and I believe everyone is passionate about aros.

Constructively, we can achieve something better, and the question, without any intention of starting a row, is: Terminills, what do you propose for this abiv0, v1, and v11 situation? Perhaps now is the time to create a single workspace with deadwood?

As a beginner, what's stopping abiv11 from merging into abiv1?

I also think we should open a discussion about the license, because I think it's a shame that the Apollo OS updates haven't been uploaded to the Aros Development Team GitHub, or at least that's what I think.

I also think other updates on the A600GS deserve sharing, if, as it seems, Aros is 90% up and running.

Thanks for sharing.

ABIv0 is dead as far as the main project is concerned. While I personally would view it as a waste of time in 2026 if someone wanted to extend it like Deadwood had in the past they can just know it wouldn’t be an officially sanctioned extension.

As for Deadwood working on any specific project that is his choice… he could take AROS create Deadwood’s super duper ABI 180,000 OS if he wants. That is never the issue.

But just like any other open source OS there’s a license and guidelines for using the name.

Abiv11 is incompatible with abiv1 and technically in many ways for lack of a better term out of date. As for the license APL is a soft copy left license because its file level. And while it would be appreciated if fixes were committed sometimes they are either incompatible or in a different direction than mainline chose so instead many simply rather make the source available and it can be cherry-picked.

Edited by terminills on 07-09-2026 05:56, 1 hour ago

arosbeginnerMember

Posted 3 hours ago

#18

I read this interesting discussion and I believe everyone is passionate about aros.

Constructively, we can achieve something better, and the question, without any intention of starting a row, is: Terminills, what do you propose for this abiv0, v1, and v11 situation? Perhaps now is the time to create a single workspace with deadwood?

As a beginner, what's stopping abiv11 from merging into abiv1?

I also think we should open a discussion about the license, because I think it's a shame that the Apollo OS updates haven't been uploaded to the Aros Development Team GitHub, or at least that's what I think.

I also think other updates on the A600GS deserve sharing, if, as it seems, Aros is 90% up and running.

Thanks for sharing.

Edited by arosbeginner on 07-09-2026 03:51, 3 hours ago

sonountalebanMember

Posted 18 hours ago

#17

cdimauro wrote:

NW: amigamia took the burden of getting the forum alive after that 4play has abandoned it for his personal reasons. He also saved the original archives, which are accessible in read-only mode, and thanks to his time (and money!) people can still have a look at all contributions that you were talking about.

When I left that forum in 2017-8, I remember it seemed to me that most core developers (including Kalamatee) gave up with the only Paolo from Icaros carrying the AROS bandwagon alive at some point.

Yeah, the v1 guys need, if I'm allowed to say this, to have a more pro-active public relations, possibly writing news here as often as possible if they don't mind. For example, publish monthly future plans/milestones as Deadwood does with his v11 and so on. Putting the v1 software in arosarchives.os4depot.net, because one from outside can conclude easily the v11 is supported by a community while the v1 looks more an "exercise" just to experiment things like SMP or RISC-V porting.

That said, I can't wait to see a stable SMP support - I understand the v1 is the only one branch can have this feature. Surely I'll jump on that ship when that it will happen, SMP is very crucial for any kind of modern OS and I believe likely most people agree with this.

Edited by sonountaleban on 06-09-2026 09:49, 21 hours ago

terminillsMember

Posted 18 hours ago

#16

sonountaleban wrote:

@sonountaleban -
cdimauro wrote:

NW: amigamia took the burden of getting the forum alive after that 4play has abandoned it for his personal reasons. He also saved the original archives, which are accessible in read-only mode, and thanks to his time (and money!) people can still have a look at all contributions that you were talking about.

When I left that forum in 2017-8, I remember it seemed to me that most core developers (including Kalamatee) gave up with the only Paolo from Icaros carrying the AROS bandwagon alive at some point.

Yeah, the v1 guys need, if I'm allowed to say this, to have a more pro-active public relations, possibly writing news here as often as possible if they don't mind. For example, publish monthly future plans/milestones as Deadwood does with his v11 and so on. Putting the v1 software in arosarchives.os4depot.net, because one from outside can conclude easily the v11 is supported by a community while the v1 looks more an "exercise" just to experiment things like SMP or RISC-V porting.

That said, I can't wait to see a stable SMP support - I understand the v1 is the only one branch can have this feature. Surely I'll jump on that ship when that it will happen, SMP is very crucial for any kind of modern OS and I believe likely most people agree with this.

You are quite mistaken. AROS development did not stop during that period. Paolo was a distribution maintainer. He produced almost none of the underlying operating-system code. Keeping Icaros visible is not the same thing as “carrying the AROS bandwagon alive” while the core developers supposedly gave up.

Do not confuse activity on public forums with active development. The fact that you weren’t seeing developers posting news does not mean they weren’t writing code.

In fact, there’s a rather obvious problem with the claim: had ABIv1 development stopped as you’re implying, Deadwood would have had nothing new to backport from it.

And again, lack of proper attribution is precisely the issue here. You keep pointing to all of this great work Deadwood has done, and there is no question that he has done a lot. But his work does not exist in a vacuum. It stands on the shoulders of the developers who created the code he was then able to port or backport to ABIv0 and ABIv11.

That isn’t taking anything away from Deadwood. Giving the original developers credit for writing something does not somehow deprive the person who later ports it of credit for the port.

Nobody has ever said you cannot use whichever branch you want. Nobody has said you cannot prefer ABIv11 or appreciate Deadwood’s work. The issue is this repeated rewriting of AROS development history in which upstream was supposedly dead, nobody was doing anything, and then Deadwood appeared and did all of this work.

That simply isn’t what happened.

Worse, this thread has already caused developers whose work you’re happily using to ask, “Why should I bother when somebody else gets credit for my work?”

So sure, keep circling the wagons. Keep dismissing the developers producing the upstream work while simultaneously praising the downstream results derived from it.

Just don’t act surprised if eventually the tap you’re drinking from runs dry.

enhancements that ABIv11 itself gained from upstream work this year alone:

* USB 3 / xHCI support

* PCI / PCI IRQ-routing improvements.

* AHCI/storage fixes and improvements

* ACPICA/ACPI Improvments.

* Poseidon/USB-stack fixes beyond xHCI itself. USB-stack work, not merely the xHCI driver.

* Kernel/platform fixes.

* Libraries, datatypes and system-component fixes..

Edited by terminills on 06-09-2026 12:13, 19 hours ago

amigamiaAdmin

Posted 18 hours ago

#15

While that is a perfectly reasonable choice for members of this site, as an administrator I have to keep decor and certain conversations from going rogue. That is why there is a TOA at registration.

1 user reacted to this post

miker1264

cdimauroMember

Posted 18 hours ago

#14

@terminills: this is just a free forum where anyone can write (assuming that he/her is able accept and apply its policy): if you think that something is wrong you can reply and give your opinion and even reporting facts.
But you certainly can't pretend that the owner/admin of the site becomes the defensor fidei of "the faith".

Which "faith" is another big point of discussion. This site doesn't represent AROS but it ALSO represent AROS: it could be subtle to get, but that's exactly the case. As well as a git repo doesn't necessarily mean that it's the only one which represents AROS. AROS started around 30 years ago, and it had a lot of work and evolution.

Now, we've different ABIs. Which one is the "original" one which deserves attention is, again, very questionable due to AROS' history and how it evolved. I don't know which technical decisions keep them separated, but honestly speaking I'm not even interested because, as a user, my only concern is about getting the software that I like and use it.

AROS was an anarchic (!) o.s. since the beginning, it still is, and nobody has the right to claim which fork is The Only One. And people can call AROS whatever they like, as long as it gets back to the roots of this platform (e.g. using any fork).

If you feel that contributors aren't well represented, well, that's not the scope of the site owner neither of the entire community, but anyone is free to write about it (again, as long as the policy of the site are followed). And you're doing it, right?.

If some people "redirect" from v1 to v11, again nobody is a watchdog here that should catch it and provide actions. But the site is free and anyone can write his comment about it.

If some people think that some another site is obsolete and AROS is dead, but on the contrary finds that it's alive because the community on THIS site is very active and the distros of some users are valid, again, it's part of the reality: it means that the other sites should be updated (or upgraded?), but it certainly it isn't responsibility of THIS site and of its members to do anything about the other sites.

And maybe it's time to go to the TL;DR: perhaps is time to unify the fragmented community AND ABIs instead of wasting time on those discussions?

Nick and other developers and people can join this forum: nobody is stopping them. The whole AROS community could benefit from it.

NW: amigamia took the burden of getting the forum alive after that 4play has abandoned it for his personal reasons. He also saved the original archives, which are accessible in read-only mode, and thanks to his time (and money!) people can still have a look at all contributions that you were talking about.

Edited by cdimauro on 06-09-2026 02:22, 1 day ago

3 users reacted to this post

sonountaleban, ntromans, miker1264

terminillsMember

Posted 18 hours ago

#13

cdimauro wrote:

@cdimauro - @terminills: this is just a free forum where anyone can write (assuming that he/her is able accept and apply its policy): if you think that something is wrong you can reply and give your opinion and even reporting facts.
But you certainly can't pretend that the owner/admin of the site becomes the defensor fidei of "the faith".

Which "faith" is another big point of discussion. This site doesn't represent AROS but it ALSO represent AROS: it could be subtle to get, but that's exactly the case. As well as a git repo doesn't necessarily mean that it's the only one which represents AROS. AROS started around 30 years ago, and it had a lot of work and evolution.

Now, we've different ABIs. Which one is the "original" one which deserves attention is, again, very questionable due to AROS' history and how it evolved. I don't know which technical decisions keep them separated, but honestly speaking I'm not even interested because, as a user, my only concern is about getting the software that I like and use it.

AROS was an anarchic (!) o.s. since the beginning, it still is, and nobody has the right to claim which fork is The Only One. And people can call AROS whatever they like, as long as it gets back to the roots of this platform (e.g. using any fork).

If you feel that contributors aren't well represented, well, that's not the scope of the site owner neither of the entire community, but anyone is free to write about it (again, as long as the policy of the site are followed). And you're doing it, right?.

If some people "redirect" from v1 to v11, again nobody is a watchdog here that should catch it and provide actions. But the site is free and anyone can write his comment about it.

If some people think that some another site is obsolete and AROS is dead, but on the contrary finds that it's alive because the community on THIS site is very active and the distros of some users are valid, again, it's part of the reality: it means that the other sites should be updated (or upgraded?), but it certainly it isn't responsibility of THIS site and of its members to do anything about the other sites.

And maybe it's time to go to the TL;DR: perhaps is time to unify the fragmented community AND ABIs instead of wasting time on those discussions?

Nick and other developers and people can join this forum: nobody is stopping them. The whole AROS community could benefit from it.

NW: amigamia took the burden of getting the forum alive after that 4play has abandoned it for his personal reasons. He also saved the original archives, which are accessible in read-only mode, and thanks to his time (and money!) people can still have a look at all contributions that you were talking about.

You’re right tldr… however I will correct you flat out ABIv1 is not a fork it is a branch of the original repo it dates back to the CVS era it did not happen after the git conversion and it’s been well documented for almost 20 years.

As for ownership the original owner never relinquished his ownership he merely stopped committing and said he no longer had time for the project also well documented in the mailing list archives.

So again do not claim something as a fact when you are merely guessing.

Proper attribution doesn’t hurt either project if anything it shows a healthy relationship. It’s not Deadwood incorrectly attributing other people’s work he is quite clear about it. It’s certain community members who blur the lines that cause the issues.

Edited by terminills on 06-09-2026 05:13, 1 day ago

amigamiaAdmin

Posted 18 hours ago

#12

Not treating anyone of their opinion. That is in extreme cases such as pornography, other abuse of such as race, religion or other illegal activities.

Edited by amigamia on 05-09-2026 11:18, 2 days ago

miker1264Software Dev

Posted 18 hours ago

#11

Although this is a forum to express opinions, in my case, sometimes it's better to keep quiet & keep working!

Very interesting discussion though.

2 users reacted to this post

deadwood, sonountaleban

OlafSchMember

Posted 18 hours ago

#10

First I think this thread derailed haevily in a kind of mud battle. If I were someone not knowing Aros and read this discussion I would not only not understand it, it would not motivate me to do something with Aros. It is harming.

Regarding discussion of different ABIs, I can only talk about the 68k branch. For some time there indeed was problem that errors were not fixed. Today this is totally different so every bug report is read and solved by Kalamatee. He is really doing a great job. I am at the moment changing my distribution from Deadwoods branch to the main branch. It has several advantages to me. Bugs are fixed and there is rapid development iike added CD32 support to 68k. Kalamatee has there huge responsibility because he has to examine the commits sent to him. General in my view all future distributions except those based on ABI0 (the old 32bit X86 platform) should be based on msin branch. By this it is tested a lot more than when distributions are based on static base. This also means after updating it you have to test included software. But it is worth the efforts and will accellerate the development of aros.

5 users reacted to this post

amigamia, coffeecat, terminills, Argo, deadwood

terminillsMember

Posted 18 hours ago

sonountaleban wrote:

@sonountaleban - Not sure where to start from... anyway, I used to lurk in AROS.org and its associated forum in the previous decade until somebody decided to close it down, I remember very few guys (the Icaros guy for example) kept posting occasionally there, which meant for me (and probably many other people) that AROS was dead. I've rejumped again into AROS last year thanks to this forum, by the way the only place that actually looks alive with a sort of "community". I don't know the real reasons why Deadwood has created a new fork few years ago, I really want to know them because I suspect they were mostly related to the stagnating development of 64 bit version rather than technical issues - correct me if I'm wrong please. I found out here just recently there are these v1 and v11 versions and to be fair nobody talked badly (at least explicitly) about v1, last week Deadwood himself advised me to install and try v1 to check hardware compatibility. At practical level I see v11 is pretty supported with a growing archive website and community, while I can't say the same for v1 at the moment, apart AROS.org there are no other web resources... From a point of view I think it's fair to push to use v11 to be honest. Also I have to spend some frankly and unpleasant words about AROS.org: it's still stuck at Geocities era as I left long time ago, with most pages ridiculously outdated. I still see the Developers page with the original '90s developers pictures, who already abandoned AROS 20 years ago! So, you Terminills come here, occasionally post a bit snidy replies and you expect people to know the story, while your website that you v1 guys should take care is in questionable state and offers basically little information to newcomers. No mention about differences between v1 and v11 there, too... The v11 guys may have their faults but you v1 guys have a part of guilt about the current state of the things, of course. It's sad to read "this is my precious" type of stories above, it reminds me too much the AmigaOS4 drama, the Belgian mafia and all their sick ****.
I think the best thing to do is to revamp completely AROS.org with more transparent information and the same here, maybe adding sections for x86 v1 and v11 and other flavours. The rest is just a BS.

You said "correct me if I'm wrong please." That's the one part of the post worth taking at face value, so here is the correction, and it comes from the repositories rather than from anyone's website.

The forum was not AROS.

Start here, because everything else in the post rests on it. The forum that closed was not aros.org and it was not the development project. Its disappearance tells us that a community venue disappeared. It tells us nothing whatsoever about whether anyone was writing code.

Nor is the history "the forum closed, everyone assumed AROS was dead, and then this community brought it back." That retelling skips the part worth knowing: why that forum stopped being a place the people actually developing AROS wanted to be. When developers and ordinary users leave a venue over the conduct of the same small group, what remains is not a representative community. It's the people who didn't leave, talking to each other. A handful of accounts posting for years is not evidence of where a project lives.

So "this is the only place that looks alive" doesn't mean development happens here. It can just as easily mean this is where the ones who stayed are still talking.

The same substitution runs through the whole post. "I didn't see much activity" became "AROS was dead." "This forum is active" became "this is the AROS community." "The website looks dated" became "the people behind upstream AROS are responsible for the state of the project." Not one of those follows from the one before it.

"AROS was dead."

Since the Git repository was created in May 2019, upstream AROS has taken 6,860 commits. In the last twelve months alone it took 2,492, from 32 different people. The most recent landed this week. Across that whole period Kalamatee authored 4,656 of them, about 68%. Deadwood authored 852.

Nobody discovered that AROS was dead. What was discovered is that a forum had closed, and a conclusion about a software project was drawn from the availability of a website. Those are not the same thing, and the distinction takes under a minute to demonstrate.

"Deadwood forked because 64-bit development was stagnating."

The post says "I suspect," so let's not pretend it's established. What can be established is that the fork diverged in May 2019, at the SVN-to-Git migration, and what it has consisted of since.

His repository holds 6,584 commits. He is the committer on 6,454 of them - 98%. He is the author of 2,443, about 37%. The largest body of authored work in that repository belongs to Kalamatee: 3,314 commits, just over half. Kalamatee has never committed to it. Not once, in its entire existence.

That isn't an accusation against Deadwood. His tree records authorship correctly, which is precisely how those figures were produced - from his clone. Anyone in this thread can run git shortlog -sne --no-merges against it and get the same numbers. He also does substantial original work, and his 2,443 commits are real.

But committing another person's work is not writing it. So when newcomers are told that v11 is well supported while upstream is finished, what is actually being described is upstream development reaching them through a downstream distribution, weeks to months after it was written. The fork gets the credit for it. The people who wrote it get described as having abandoned the project.

"v11 is pretty supported."

Some specifics, since this is where it stops being abstract.
RISC-V: 48 commits upstream, all by Kalamatee. Zero of them exist in the fork.
ARM and AArch64, including the Raspberry Pi work: 249 commits upstream, the majority by Bo Ståle Kopperud, who has contributed 281 commits in total and whose name rarely comes up in these threads. The fork contains 44 of those 249, and none of his.
So the architectures cited as evidence that AROS is progressing are, in large part, simply not in the tree being recommended.

Provenance.

A busy forum, a polished archive and enthusiastic users do not retroactively make upstream development the work of a fork. And upstream developers do not become answerable for a downstream community merely because both use the AROS name. Those are separate things, and the only record that distinguishes them is the commit history - who wrote what, when, and where it landed.

Why this is being raised.

Because this thread is not an isolated case. It is the same account of AROS that newcomers here are given repeatedly: that upstream is finished, that development happens downstream, and that the fork is where AROS now lives. None of it is true, and it doesn't survive five minutes with either repository, but it doesn't need to survive scrutiny when everyone in the room already agrees and no one checks.

That is how a project's work gets reassigned. Not by anyone lying, but by a small number of people repeating a convenient summary to people who have no reason to doubt it, until it becomes the version that gets passed on. The post above is that version being passed on again, by someone who says outright that he didn't know the history and had to be told it here.

If newcomers are going to be given "transparent information," give them all of it - including how this forum came to be the only one left, and why the people writing the code aren't on it. Don't take the consequences of a community that drove people out and present them as proof the project had died, and don't then use the space that left to claim its development history.

aros.org.

It isn't the upstream project's job to host an account of a downstream fork, which would necessarily mean hosting that fork's explanation of why it exists. If the difference between the lines needs documenting, ask the people who created the second one.

Use Deadwood's fork if that's what you want. Nobody is arguing otherwise. But stop calling it AROS, and stop presenting it as an official or sanctioned version of it. It is a downstream line, maintained by one person, containing a majority of code he did not write.

Edited by amigamia on 05-09-2026 10:36, 2 days ago

olivier2222Newbie

Posted 18 hours ago

@amigamia: Your are the one threatening others for their opinions. I urge you to tell this to my ISP.

amigamiaAdmin

Posted 18 hours ago

amigamia wrote:

@amigamia - ... you have the power to correct them and explain (or better "prove" that what they are posting in here is incorrect or not based on facts. You are a member of this site just as they are...

In amending my own response, I want to take this opportunity to remind everyone that whatever you chose to post in here is governed by the TOA (Terms of Agreement) you agreed to when you registered your account. In particular this:

Quote

.. You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. Creating multiple accounts for a single user is not allowed. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this site have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should they see fit...

2 users reacted to this post

miker1264

olivier2222

DeremonMember

Posted 18 hours ago

I don't know if it can help but I can bring my experience of what I saw when I was approaching AROS in 2022/2023.

A bit of background:
I started with an amiga 500 in my youth then I had to switch to a PC (DOS/Win3) cause of school and, well, all my friends had a PC so...
When I started working I started using linux and I had the chance to buy a "last stock piece G3 mac before G4" with OS9 and OSX these gave me an alternative to Win2k/XP BUT all I miss was the Amiga experience.
I had looked on Amithlon and AROS but I had no time to keep an eye on them at the time.

So comes 2022/2023, when I first looked back to AROS, I started from aros.org, I found the site (from a new user point of view):
- quite outdated
- snapshot wasn' t updated (last is dated 2017 even now)
- progress page was not updated from 2016 (as it is now)
- documentation was scattered around, on the current version is better organized
- all I was left with were nightlies and the distro page, now vanished
- at the time project feel abandoned, is better now with the updated news feed

So at the time in the distro page I found IcarOS I really liked it and then I found this forum.
IcarOS was working fine (but it was already been abandoned) while I had difficulties with nightlies.
Also I could not find software I needed at time (an updated scummvm in particular but not only that), I was tempted to abandon AROS and just stick with amithlon and the upcoming pistorm+emu68 (I still have my amiga, now pistormed) but my "system engineer part" wanted drill down and solve the problem (it's my work and I like it) so I started tinkering with abiv0, abiv1 and abiv11 where I discovered all the incompatibilities.

Before the "system engineer part" probably is were an "average user" end without an help.

But I kept on it and I started porting software, not what an "average user" will do, seriously

If I look at projects like Haiku (one can not like Haiku, it's fine, I'm not discussing of the OS) webpage is very well done even is not "bleeding edge html5", I have attached a screenshot with the "things that help new users":

- Easy to find links to download a stable version (more on that later)
- Easy to find links to a community forum (very important)
- Easy to find user guide
- Presence of a donation counter that help the user undestand that the project is *alive* aside from news feed

What I can do to improve the situation:
While I cannot contribute much economically (I'm trying saving a bit for that), I'm spending my free time to port things.
I started a project to "adapt" or port much software as possible from archives to 64 bit architectures and, with Kalamatee blessing, push it to mainline ports repo.

So, now the important part:
I think we are all circling the missing point, that from me is, AROS mainline severely lacks of a stable release.
From my point of view you cannot expect an "Average user" to download a nightly or distro maintainers to base their work on nightlies and also this is not expected from the description from the aros.org nightly page itself:

"
Note

- These builds are experimental and not for general consumption. Users should instead download one of the available AROS distributions.
- Binaries/Developer Tools are incompatible with previous ABI versions.
- The use of any information or materials on this page is entirely at your own risk. The AROS Dev Team accepts no liability whatsoever for any loss or damage incurred from using the files listed on this page.
"

It's a situation that in english could be translated by "to be between a rock and a hard place." a situation without a favorable exit or a circling situation.

What can be done from my point of view, and of course in this Kalamatee MUST be involved to in the long run eventually "re-unite" ABIs:

Fundamental:
- Understand what AROS should be, just an experiment for niche devs without any real world application (aside from people who take the code with their projects or sell it with a closed source project) or a *real* open source "amiga like" OS for the masses? If the reasponse is the former than we can just close the discussion here.

Very important (given the answer is the latter):
- Have an initial stable release ABIv1, graphics and icons may not matter now, stability should, it can pass different betas (like haiku do) but every subsequent stable version must backward compatibile or is not a stable version by my definition of stable. Something may break in nighlies but it should work in betas and stable.
- Have a defined roadmap like Deadwood do for his fork with milestones to be reached and periodically progess announcements.
- Bring the community to mainline site.

Important:
- Distributions based on the stable release and betas (yay nice icons!).
- Distributions brought back to main site.
- FAQ and easy docs for the "Average user" and below.

Nice to have:
- Donation to the project to fund additionals developers (payed devs) to help Kalamatee and Deadwood.
- Merchandise to fund the project? ( just an idea one may not like it but as latins said: "Pecunia non olet" ) .

These are my "two cents" I hope a point of view from someone who skipped all the dramas (even amiga ones) may help.

Edited by Deremon on 05-09-2026 13:54, 2 days ago

2 users reacted to this post

sonountaleban

olivier2222

You do not have access to view attachments

AMIGASYSTEMDistro Maintainer

Posted 18 hours ago

Terminills, first of all, I want to point out that I’m using a translator because I don’t know English, and a lot of what’s written here isn’t my exact wording but rather the translator’s interpretation…

If a user tells me that AROS ABiv1 won’t start in VMware, and after testing it I confirm this, what should I say to that user? And if the user then tells me that the new ports and the new software released for v11 don’t work on v1, what should I tell them?

amigamiaAdmin

Posted 18 hours ago

OK, looks like I managed to get you to open up and explain in detail what you could have done in the first place. Perhaps I would have used a better and more constructive tone and less attacking one.

You accused this site being responsible for steering away users from aros.org and/or ABIv1 when you really meant was for specific posts by certain members.

Please keep in mind, this is a forum site where members are free to join to discover aros, share ideas, experiences, software, etc. etc. and in the mix sometimes users came up with an incorrect view or a misconception about AROS.

As I said earlier, you have the power to correct them and explain (or better "prove") that what they are posting in here is incorrect or not based on facts. You are a member of this site just as they are. And if you feel that this site doesn't work for you in conveying your message to the masses, you are more than welcome to post a statement on aros.org that explains what is ABIv1, ABIv11, ABIv0 and who does what, who is responsible for whatnot.

Edited by amigamia on 04-09-2026 21:12, 2 days ago

3 users reacted to this post

Argo, sonountaleban

olivier2222

terminillsMember

Posted 18 hours ago

AMIGASYSTEM wrote:

@AMIGASYSTEM - Terminills, first of all, I want to point out that I’m using a translator because I don’t know English, and a lot of what’s written here isn’t my exact wording but rather the translator’s interpretation…

If a user tells me that AROS ABiv1 won’t start in VMware, and after testing it I confirm this, what should I say to that user? And if the user then tells me that the new ports and the new software released for v11 don’t work on v1, what should I tell them?

Well the correct response would have been to explain where the AROS bugs are reported… that was a perfect example you told him not to use ABIv1 … I reported the bug to kalamatee and the bug was squashed in less than 24 hours. Nothing is constructive by ignoring bugs and steering people towards your preferred platform.

As for software … quite simple not there’s no software for but instead explain the difference.. you’re creating a self fulfilling prophecy.

Edited by terminills on 04-09-2026 23:21, 2 days ago

sonountalebanMember

Posted 18 hours ago

Not sure where to start from... anyway, I used to lurk in AROS.org and its associated forum in the previous decade until somebody decided to close it down, I remember very few guys (the Icaros guy for example) kept posting occasionally there, which meant for me (and probably many other people) that AROS was dead. I've rejumped again into AROS last year thanks to this forum, by the way the only place that actually looks alive with a sort of "community". I don't know the real reasons why Deadwood has created a new fork few years ago, I really want to know them because I suspect they were mostly related to the stagnating development of 64 bit version rather than technical issues - correct me if I'm wrong please. I found out here just recently there are these v1 and v11 versions and to be fair nobody talked badly (at least explicitly) about v1, last week Deadwood himself advised me to install and try v1 to check hardware compatibility. At practical level I see v11 is pretty supported with a growing archive website and community, while I can't say the same for v1 at the moment, apart AROS.org there are no other web resources... From a point of view I think it's fair to push to use v11 to be honest. Also I have to spend some frankly and unpleasant words about AROS.org: it's still stuck at Geocities era as I left long time ago, with most pages ridiculously outdated. I still see the Developers page with the original '90s developers pictures, who already abandoned AROS 20 years ago! So, you Terminills come here, occasionally post a bit snidy replies and you expect people to know the story, while your website that you v1 guys should take care is in questionable state and offers basically little information to newcomers. No mention about differences between v1 and v11 there, too... The v11 guys may have their faults but you v1 guys have a part of guilt about the current state of the things, of course. It's sad to read "this is my precious" type of stories above, it reminds me too much the AmigaOS4 drama, the Belgian mafia and all their sick ****.

I think the best thing to do is to revamp completely AROS.org with more transparent information and the same here, maybe adding sections for x86 v1 and v11 and other flavours. The rest is just a BS.

Edited by amigamia on 05-09-2026 10:34, 2 days ago

2 users reacted to this post

Argo

olivier2222

terminillsMember

Posted 18 hours ago

AMIGASYSTEM wrote:

@AMIGASYSTEM - Terminills, we're just discussing this, don't get upset. I'm not a developer; I'm just a 73-year-old guy who enjoys playing around with AROS. Tell me what you want me to remove from Aros One, and I'll remove it!

There was a quite simple solution… “sorry for the omission” and adding a couple paragraphs and links to the site about the actual main project.

But instead you doubled down.

Do not ever include Finalwriter Demo or otherwise in any of your distros.

You can view all discussion threads in this forum.
You cannot start a new discussion thread in this forum.
You cannot reply in this discussion thread.
You cannot start on a poll in this forum.
You cannot upload attachments in this forum.
You cannot download attachments in this forum.

Users who participated in discussion: amigamia, terminills, AMIGASYSTEM, cdimauro, miker1264, OlafSch, arosbeginner, Deremon, olivier2222, sonountaleban

Search AROSWorld

ABIv1 vs ABIv11 and ABIv0, Branches, Upstream, Downstream, and other related items