Board index FlightGear The FlightGear project

On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Questions about the FlightGear organisation, website, wiki etc.

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby Jabberwocky » Sun May 03, 2015 11:20 pm

Again, I think, the question, we avoid here is, what we want FG to be. FGADDON, FGMEMBERS, even the struggle of the shuttle project, those are symptoms. Unfortunately, after I posed that question and a lot of others, there was this "quote" list, which is nice but buried the question that appeared important to me.
Fine, we have turbulence, we have obviously some old citizens in the project clinging on to what they are used to and don't shy even from highly questionable tactics, like silencing and banning. Fine, we have new guys on the block. Tension was inevitable. The sad part is that in a so almost exclusively technical oriented project, the technical advantages of a solution aren't even worthy a discussion anymore because our front desk girl is too busy to avoid people from staying with us and our old citizenry is too busy to cling on power positions.
The only way to get out of this swamp is, if we could pause a moment and take the time to synchronize our visions for FG. Because it appears to be the only thing supplying common ground at this stage.
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby Hooray » Mon May 04, 2015 1:21 am

I do think that your are, once again, mis-representing the true situation - but for the sake of the project, I suggest to just accept that different approaches are being pursued by different contributors - not unlike FlightGear supports multiple FDM engines, different GUI solutions and different rendering frameworks.

So there's no reason to get religious about this and continue having flame wars like - you happen to belong to a camp of people who believe in fgmembers, while others have carefully explained, why they are pursuing a different approach and implementation, extensively discussed by long-term contributors and pre-dating fgmembers by years - so I guess at this point it makes sense to just move an and simply make your point that "your" solution is superior by actually contributing accordingly and letting fgmembers evolve like you -and others- envision it , instead of resurrecting this debate over and over again, which is only harming the project, and the reputation of fgmembers and its proponents.

Note that this is, like I said, not inherent to fgmembers - we do have countless examples of approaches and technology stacks that are supported only by a subset of contributors/core developers, with others working on competing, and even conflicting, solutions.

Equally, there's more than just one "side-kick" that hasn't yet made it into "stock FG" - which you could consider "potential allies" down the road, should you manage to align and position yourselves accordingly within the community.

fgmembers no longer needs to be discussed, and also doesn't need to be promoted on the forum - we have offered to use the project's official wiki to maintain a corresponding article there and document all specifics, and that is kinda what people are expecting to happen, and willing to tolerate apparently.

The longer this is going on "as is", the more unlikely it will become for fgmembers to gain any traction among seasoned contributors, especially core developers obviously.

Also, as a volunteer involved in helping maintain the forum from time to time, I am hereby informing the fgmembers folks that I will discuss and consider merging all fgmembers related postings from now an with the corresponding thread in the 3rd party repositories forum, and would thus suggest to directly post any relevant postings there and not use any other threads as a platform, because there's now a dedicated place to deal with "3rd party repositories".
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: 11493
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby Jabberwocky » Fri May 08, 2015 9:03 pm

Well, I aksed bout what we all envision for FlightGear in the future ... and Hooray answered, he will stick with his wrongful definition of "official" derived only from the self-perceived authority of some people and bannish everything else to third party. So I know now, Hooray envisions an autocracy ... anyone else with visions?
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby clrCoda » Fri May 08, 2015 9:21 pm

Hooray is no more or no less a volunteer as anyone else here with an opinion.

--Ray

post edit: That is, he is not the "official" volunteer. :) hehe
Ray St. Marie
clrCoda
 
Posts: 1228
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 11:04 am

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby Jabberwocky » Fri May 08, 2015 9:26 pm

He is, but he claims always, there is an "official", which per definition (see Merriam-Webster http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/official) can't be because we haven't even someone "holding an office" or something like that. In so far, his "official decision" to put FGMEMBERS in a third party thread because he id "official" enough to decide "officially", that's what it is borders at least formally on imposture.
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby clrCoda » Fri May 08, 2015 9:31 pm

I have heard people that will say things like "Hooray thinks he's the voice of flightgear!" With respect to how helpful Hooray can be at times, good or bad is in the eye of the beholder.

For my money: there are as many voices of flightgear as there are people willing to lend a voice.

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

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby Hooray » Sat May 09, 2015 1:35 am

Jabberwocky wrote in Fri May 08, 2015 9:03 pm:Well, I aksed bout what we all envision for FlightGear in the future ... and Hooray answered, he will stick with his wrongful definition of "official" derived only from the self-perceived authority of some people and bannish everything else to third party. So I know now, Hooray envisions an autocracy ... anyone else with visions?


there is no such "wrongful definition" of the term "official": there's a single group of people who can be considered core developers, including those with commit/maintainer access - there is a single official website, there is a single official mailing list, there is a single official forum, there is a single official issue tracker used/provided by this group of people - there is tons of other official infrastructure provided by these people. Infrastructure that you happen to keep using, despite having a fairly flawed misunderstanding when it comes to the terminology of the word "official".

I have repeatedly stated -in public, and in private- that I am not even part of this group of people, and that I don't have any aspirations of becoming part of them - but we still gotta accept, that there are contributors behind the project, who get to determine what is "official" (-ly endorsed/supported) and what isn't.

Just as has been previously stated, there are different kinds of people, and contributors, involved in the project - but just being a volunteer here doesn't give you (or me) any authority when it comes to what is "official". If you don't understand that, I am sincerely sorry for you, but I really suggest that you stop wasting our time here - if in doubt, you could start a forum poll to learn more about what is generally considered, and accepted, as being "official" when it comes to the FlightGear project, and all its infrastructure.

The "GPL" has zero, nada and NOTHING to do with the main project and what its people, and what they consider/endorse as being "official".

Equally, there is no "self-perceived authority" when a group of people agree on what "official" means for them - it just happens to be their modus operandi.
If you are so concerned about being left out of the loop, I suggest that you raise this elsewhere - certainly not on the forum, and certainly not by attacking, and mis-quoting, me or what I said, because it either demonstrates a pathetic lack of reading/comprehension skills, or an even worse tendency to preach to the choir (again, I am not even part of the group you are trying to attack here).

Like you stated in the other thread, once you have "your" own infrastructure in place, and a team of people willing to use it, you folks get to decide what you consider/accept and propagate as being "official". In the meantime, please do consider stopping to poison the FG forums with all this pointless .... you'll really find the truth by stopping to ridicule yourself here, and actually reading up on how the project works and who is involved in which parts of the project to hopefully make better informed statements.
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: 11493
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: On the Current State of Affairs in FlightGear

Postby Jabberwocky » Sat May 09, 2015 1:49 am

I refer you once more to Merriam-Webster and the meaning of the word.
And stop lying: As I stated, FGMEMBERS is for ALL GPL-Licensed planes. That's the rule and end of the story.
The other thing about "my" infrastructure, I hereby apologize to use my own hardware including my rented virtual web server to experiment with techniques that maybe can become helpful for users in the future. Since we all know what Hooray thinks about "users", I can understand, he is upset about everything, that helps users at some point.

But a word for the wise, someone should actually whistle the attack dog back. I am not the one discussing an FG clone, others do, which in part is consequence of Hooray all the time trying to get people banned or to drive them away. So someone who has the interest of the project in mind may want to consider where the limit is.
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Previous

Return to The FlightGear project

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest