Board index FlightGear The FlightGear project

FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Questions about the FlightGear organisation, website, wiki etc.

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby Hooray » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:25 pm

this has been previously explained on the devel list: git is for developers (which is where it is being used already) - while "svn" is easier to understand/use (given the tooling available on some platforms) for less tech-savvy folks, i.e. harder to screw up things. Then again, while the fgmembers folks are making a strong case on using git, they have also repeatedly demonstrated that their "git fu" really is only very basic - just imagine for a second that you'd be asked to get groceries, and someone tells you that you need a F1 car, because it is "so much better" - but that someone cannot even tell you how to turn on the engine on that thing, let alone how to operate it safely.

"svn" is intended to be used by non-coders, i.e. the people doing aircraft development (textures, 3D modeling, sounds, effects etc) - and it really is much better accessible on some platforms.

While I am familiar with "git", it's taken a ton of time to explain basic git concepts to some of our existing fgdata committers - and we still did see messed up git commits, despite fairly good wiki docs.

Overall, this is a ridiculous discussion, because Jabberwocky et al have been making postings for the better part of a year suggesting that the FG project is too much focused on "coders", and doesn't look at end-user/aircraft developer needs - and now people are complaining about a move from git to svn for ac development.

Honestly, I do believe that we're giving too much attention to certain people around here, and wasting a ton of time in the process - it is for a reason that FG happens to be a meritocracy: it cannot afford to deal with all the feedback that end-users and even lurkers may come up with, especially the MP/VA community tend to cause quite some havok, with very little visible RoR unfortunately.

In fact, some of you may find it unfortunate that there so few core devs visiting/using the forum, but the forum would immediately be in a much better shape without MP/VA folks who often may not have any tangible/visible involvement other than just "using" existing project infrastructure (for free!) and then expecting to tell the project how to prioritize things, without also offering to get involved in at least /some/ way, even if that just means helping with end-user support or writing/updating end-user documentation.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby bugman » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:43 pm

Not that it counts for much, but I see things in a rather different light. I'll use an analogy: the job at hand is to tighten a large bolt. I have two choices - a basic combination spanner (or combination wrench if you are on the other side of the Atlantic), or a monkey wrench. Both will get the job done perfectly fine. Which should I choose? Personally, I don't care. Svn vs. git - I use both all of the time. Both have their advantages - yes both do - and both have their disadvantages. But when you get to the bottom of it, both are tools which are perfectly capable of getting the job at hand done! It's so sad watching 2 months of bickering over what is really an argument over a basic work tool :shock:
Last edited by bugman on Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1804
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:48 pm

Buckaroo wrote in Thu Apr 30, 2015 3:53 pm:It's a fine point perhaps, and I can understand if some people don't understand or agree with it. But speaking for myself, if I believed it would be my decision to put my efforts in FGMEMBERS and that FGMEMBERS would abide by my decision if I declined, I would feel much more positive about it.

-Buck


Dear Buck
You are correct in your assumptions.
If you release over GPL clause, I will not ask again if that work can be provided as well over FGMEMBERs.
You will be authorizing every party to copy that work and redistribute; which include FGMEMBERs and much anybody else.

There is not clause where you can say, its GPL for this repository or this group of people, or for Private use Only: but it is not GPL otherwise. Such lamentable postures remember me slightly of Vitos and his Su15 license attempts.

Best,
IH-COL

In fact, I believe, Creative Commons still allow the same set of clauses, that include our ability to copy/ and redistribute the work, as well. Technically speaking.
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:52 pm

@Hooray

People that is uncomfortable with git, but very proficient over SVN can use Subversion to interact with the github repositories

https://help.github.com/articles/suppor ... n-clients/
https://github.com/blog/1178-collaborat ... subversion

People that preffer developing in git but decide to / or are allowed to collaborate in the FGAddon Subversion repository, regularly use git-svn software to interact over the SVN repository

http://git-scm.com/book/en/v1/Git-and-O ... Subversion

Claiming that a "subversion repository" has to be the solution for aircraft development because certain developer (s) are unable to use git is a very void point.

Also, your persistence in de-meriting my work, and calling me incompetent is really wearing old. --just saying

Best,
IH-COL
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:57 pm

Dear Vincent (KL-666)
Branching is doable on a subversion repository
I am was not aware that using the current set up of the FGAddon repository you can branch one single aircraft.
Branching 469 aircrafts to get one small variant of one little aircraft every single time is what I say, impracticable --when the FGAddon repository already weights past 25GB of data unbranched.

In the case of FGMEMBERs, every aircraft is an independent repository. We branch any of those repositories to provide development versions, or alternative aircraft version on the fly. We do it continuosly.

Best,
IH-COL
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby bugman » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:02 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:57 pm:I am not aware that using the current set up of the FGAddon repository you can branch one single aircraft.


In subversion you can branch everything - individual subdirectories or files included. Actually in this respect, subversion is far superior to git.
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1804
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 5:05 pm

ok ;)

Good.
Thanks for the clarification Ed.

Then that means that the FGAddon can branch one aircraft (a.k.a. directory), if so wished, as well.

@KL-666: your post is extremely insightful on every word. Keep in mind there are some difference in a few other fronts, such as if "my" work is GPL, why would someone else feel liberty to "take it" over an alternative development repository.

Commit priviledges fit very well in you analogy of "sky is the limit". One do not need to worry about providing particular commiting priviledges to any particular individual. Unknown collaborators can fork, commit on their "own house" and pull request. Demostrating one's worth is done with an appriori authorization to proceed and demostrate onself, or in the early cases, allows for a person to have a learning playground -- the individual's fork
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 6:41 pm

viewtopic.php?f=42&t=26115&start=30#p241133

Thanks Wlbragg

@Thorsten

I am very sorry, but in addition to the uneasiness that I'd had over the decision taken over the SpaceShuttle, Wlbragg brings a very valid point. It is not me loosing a point to you. It is the end users of the FGMEMBERs and the FGDATA next with submodules who loose the ability to get the SpaceShuttle with equal convenience as every other aircraft. And also their ability to just fork it and submit modifications of their own to FGMEMBERs.

That should not be really my response to your 3 pages of Forum Tantrum.

I apologize to you but I revert my commit over deleting the Shuttle, and I revert my decision of not tracking its advance on the FGAddon as well.
I apologize to FGMEMBERs users to attempt bringing calm in all the wrong ways.

Best,
IH-COL
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby curt » Thu Apr 30, 2015 6:47 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Thu Apr 30, 2015 4:52 pm:@Hooray

Also, your persistence in de-meriting my work, and calling me incompetent is really wearing old. --just saying


Hooray, that would be called a dust back pitch, you were starting to crowd the plate. :-)

(Baseball) A pitch intentionally thrown by a pitcher directly at or very close to the batter, intended to make the batter stand further away from home plate; also called a dust-back pitch or a dust-back.
curt
Administrator
 
Posts: 1174
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 7:13 pm

Image
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby clrCoda » Thu Apr 30, 2015 8:25 pm

I have to submit that I had shared a couple of planes to individuals in this forum that were having specific problems that we had resolved at my VA ( I'll get to you Hooray about your VA comment later).

What then happened is suddenly these temporary planes which I have no intention of continuing work on (unless something very important needs to be addressed) were put into FGmembers and not by me. One such plane is an ancient version of Syd's B1900D, now in a branch of the master-well out of tune - for global virtual airlines that i have every intention of deleting just as soon as Syd returns the current model to the functionality it once attained.

But you know, I had to forgo being offended because I recognized an opportunity to be instructed personally by someone that knows Git well enough, and time and patience enough to help me learn it.

By not being overly demonstrative about what I considered an offence to my planing for the aircraft, I instead was afforded an education in something I had interest in. Thanks for your time, yesterday Israel, please don't do it again hehe :)

--Ray
Ray St. Marie
clrCoda
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:04 am

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 8:53 pm

;)
sure Ray
No worries.
We are all looking forward for Syd's new version too ;P

And if you need help, anytime. Let me know.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby clrCoda » Thu Apr 30, 2015 8:54 pm

Hooray wrote:Honestly, I do believe that we're giving too much attention to certain people around here, and wasting a ton of time in the process - it is for a reason that FG happens to be a meritocracy: it cannot afford to deal with all the feedback that end-users and even lurkers may come up with, especially the MP/VA community tend to cause quite some havok, with very little visible RoR unfortunately.

In fact, some of you may find it unfortunate that there so few core devs visiting/using the forum, but the forum would immediately be in a much better shape without MP/VA folks who often may not have any tangible/visible involvement other than just "using" existing project infrastructure (for free!) and then expecting to tell the project how to prioritize things, without also offering to get involved in at least /some/ way, even if that just means helping with end-user support or writing/updating end-user documentation.


I run the longest lasting VA in recent flightgear history. Some facts off the top of my head about VA and members.

But first, I acknowledge that you may have used an unfortunate turn of phrase here by making a generalization about a class of people. So it is apparent I use that fact for my own ends here as well.

Usually a potential VA member is too embarrassed to join a VA unless that pilot can land successfully in at least one of the planes the VA offers. This can often reflect an experience many "users" who don't also happen to be modelers share. A year or so using flightgear, followed by a question they need answered, and maybe even their very first forum post.

Often the path has been that another person with a VA in their signature has answered their question, either in previous post or directly in a current post. Often the answer found on google is in a va forum.

Knowing they can land a plane, (finally! hehe ) and discovering that VA's tend to have information they might be looking for, and helpful people that answer questions without OVER answering... They might join the va.

Some of the most talented modelers, plane developers have come out of VA's: have even been members of my VA. Before the potential of what I expect FGmembers to be able to afford to the community, VA's caused the creation and the modifications needed to make many of the flightgear offering usable. The list is long.

I believe you and the rest reading can get the gist of what I could write hours about here. While I do agree with you that there are INDIVIDUALS that can me taxiing on the system, and these INDIVIDUALS might even afford themselves the usage of the MP network and belong to any number of VA's, to single out the class is an unfortunate faux pas on your part.

-- My best to you sir. :)
Ray
Ray St. Marie
clrCoda
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:04 am

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby Hooray » Thu Apr 30, 2015 9:21 pm

no offense intended or taken - in fact, you will have noticed that I didn't generally state that all MP/VA folks are causing problems, but often it's primarily those without involvement other than actually just using the MP/VA infrastructure, while expecting top-notch end-user support and responsiveness on the forum/issue tracker.
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: FGAddon vs. FGMEMBERS, bus factors etc.

Postby KL-666 » Sat May 02, 2015 1:38 pm

In this post:
http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=26115&p=241364&sid=77754d9b7ab72929d83b523a65823fab#p241362

Philosopher says something i have a long standing question about. But i do not think it fits in "On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear", so i write it in this topic.

...but SVN and sourceforge were likely seen as the only options, because, absent Israel's clever way to split into several Git repos....


The word clever in this amazes me, because i would have thought this is a basic principle of organizing your VCS.

The programming culture i come from has completely drilled me to avoid a monolithic project. Always be on the lookout for opportunities to split off modules if you can achieve a one-way dependency to a more central module. Especially if you may get more of the same modules later on.

In that line VCS is drilled the same. Whenever there are modules with a one-way dependency, put them in seperate repositories. Make repositories as small as they can possibly be and avoid a monolithic repository of everything. Even though SVN can branch parts of a monolithic repository, i believe they also advise to work with smaller repositories when possible.

When i look at flightgear, i see the programming separation of modules: core and aircraft. But to my amazement i do not see the aircraft in separate repositories, but in a monolithic one.

Is there a rationale behind it to put all planes in one repository? Or is it more like that it just grew that way without really making a consious dicision about it?

Kind regards, vincent
KL-666
 
Posts: 784
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 1:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to The FlightGear project

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest