Board index FlightGear Support 3rd Party Repositories

Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Tue Apr 21, 2015 3:33 pm

Image

New Submodules! :D

@All

A new submodule for FGDATA Next had now been added for developers and early testers interested in the fantastic Airbus A350WXB, now released in early beta GPL!

The aircraft is in early stages of development, but anyone interested can follow this forum thread : viewtopic.php?f=4&t=20334

Another new submodule includes a new variant of the C172p with Bush Plane kits, by N22.

Have fun developing :D

IH-COL

Code: Select all
Aircraft/A350XWB
Aircraft/Turbo-c172p
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:39 pm, edited 1 time 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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:37 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Sat Apr 18, 2015 12:39 am:FGDATA NEXT with submodules updated to SVN Revision 589

That's it :D
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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Sun Apr 26, 2015 5:12 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Sat Apr 18, 2015 12:39 am:FGDATA NEXT with submodules updated to SVN Revision 630

That's it :D
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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 6:53 am


The Space Shuttle submodule will not track progress by the Development team

By express petition by Thorsten Renk, the FGMEMBERS repository has stopped tracking new development over the Space Shuttle

I lament this decision since this is one of the most visionary works flightgear has seen in years.

Everyone, may rest assured the work remains under GPL clause and can be obtained in FGAddon repository.
Thus, you can copy, modify or redistribute. And off course, test and fly

Have fun Flying,
IH-COL
Last edited by IAHM-COL on Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:07 pm, edited 1 time 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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:00 pm

Hi All
By courtesy of the Forum managers our thread has been moved again.
This is our new home ;)

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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Thu Apr 30, 2015 10:08 pm

The previous decision of not fetching the SpaceShuttle to FGMEMBERs and FGDATA with submodules had been reverted.
No "preferential" treatment for this repository.

Enjoy a safe ride to the moon ;)
And thanks Thorsten for all your fantastic work :)

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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby Thorsten » Fri May 01, 2015 5:09 am

No "preferential" treatment for this repository.


I do not want any preferential treatment, I in fact suggest you care for the consent of every developer before you grab stuff unasked. What you do goes quite against anything FG ever stood for. We've had a long tradition of developers talking to each other and honoring intentions respectively, you single-handedly and systematically decided to do away with that. This has nothing to do with the freedom you advertize - that's the parasitic development you don't want to be.

As has been pointed out to you, FG is more about relationships between people than about patches submitted and committed. That's only the fallback solution in case talking doesn't work. You just cut the relationships out of the loop and do things because you can.

If you respect my work, please honor my request. No matter whether it might inconvenience someone.

You can't maintain a repository against the people who provide the content. In the short term, you will have things more convenient, but developers always have the option of changing to do new work under a different license and make sure their intentions get taken seriously - at which point everyone will lose.

I also think you will find that many will give you freely if you just ask what they object to if you just take without asking.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11194
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby bugman » Fri May 01, 2015 10:47 am

Hi Israel,

I would like to clear up what I see as a legal misconception with FGMEMBERS. I have noticed that you are continually asking about aircraft being licenced as GPL. However if you read the GitHub terms of service, you will see that that this question is totally unnecessary. Quoting Wikipedia:


In addition, as this is a loose submodule approach (in legal terms it is not a bundling into one centralised repository), each submodule can have its own licence. Licence incompatibility for FGMEMBERS is a non-issue!

Therefore you are free to absorb into FGMEMBERS almost all aircraft ever created for FlightGear! You can fork all aircraft with open source licences (GPL, Creative Commons, MPL, MIT, etc), public domain, as well as some proprietary planes into FGMEMBERS. You are completely free to incorporate all private hangers - FGUK, Lake Of Constance, PAF, etc. I.e. absolutely everything listed at http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightGear_hangars can be brought into FGMEMBERS!

Regards,

Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1719
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby AndersG » Fri May 01, 2015 12:06 pm

bugman wrote in Fri May 01, 2015 10:47 am:Therefore you are free to absorb into FGMEMBERS almost all aircraft ever created for FlightGear! You can fork all aircraft with open source licences (GPL, Creative Commons, MPL, MIT, etc), public domain, as well as some proprietary planes into FGMEMBERS. You are completely free to incorporate all private hangers - FGUK, Lake Of Constance, PAF, etc. I.e. absolutely everything listed at http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightGear_hangars can be brought into FGMEMBERS!


Provided the aircraft in question can be redistributed at all (e.g. Victor Slavutinsky's latest creation probably may not).

Another issue with gobbling up 3rd party hangars without consent is that the original author is quite unlikely to watch the FGMembers clone for bug reports and merge requests while it might look like a good place to put them for users. Notices pointing bug reports and merge requests to the source of the respective aircraft would be appreciated.

E.g. for me it is quite enough to maintain my aircraft in my hangar and in FGAddon, a third place is one too much so I will ignore it.
(Additionally, some of the FGMembers clones of my aircraft already appear messed up due to overambitious merging.)
Callsign: SE-AG
Aircraft (uhm...): Submarine Scout, Zeppelin NT, ZF Navy free balloon, Nordstern, Hindenburg, Short Empire flying-boat, ZNP-K, North Sea class, MTB T21 class, U.S.S. Monitor, MFI-9B, Type UB I submarine, Gokstad ship, Renault FT.
AndersG
 
Posts: 2448
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:20 am
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Callsign: SE-AG
OS: Debian GNU Linux

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby Hooray » Fri May 01, 2015 2:03 pm

there are tools for distributed issue tracking supported via SCMs like svn or git (usually flat files and/or meta info) - so if "submodules" are likely to be used by more and more aircraft developers, this may be worth exploring sooner or later.

http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/blog/post ... -trackers/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:D ... ng_systems
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: 11376
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri May 01, 2015 3:07 pm

bugman wrote in Fri May 01, 2015 10:47 am:
Therefore you are free to absorb into FGMEMBERS almost all aircraft ever created for FlightGear! You can fork all aircraft with open source licences (GPL, Creative Commons, MPL, MIT, etc), public domain, as well as some proprietary planes into FGMEMBERS. You are completely free to incorporate all private hangers - FGUK, Lake Of Constance, PAF, etc. I.e. absolutely everything listed at http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightGear_hangars can be brought into FGMEMBERS!

Regards,

Edward



Dear Ed.
Thanks for this message. It is very insightful.

I have thought about it. Back and forth bouncing my mind.
I know that I could re-distribute any material with allowed "copy/modify/redistribution" clauses. This includes, as an example all the variety an arrays of Creative Commons Licenses.

The point that have made me re-consider, really, is the fact that I use "the submodules" to repopulate the FGDATA with submodules repository.
You can see that Flightgear project, and inclusive FGDATA is covered broadly under GPL license. Thus all content within FGDATA is also covered this way. If I were to add repositories with an array of "free source" licenses, then the FGDATA next with submodules may be stepping beyond some legal boundary :"Example, re-licensing material that is CC under a source fully covered as GPL could be considered as re-licensing, and that may have broader legal impact.

I had thus preffer the KISS approach. By trying to guarantee all the FGMEMBERs area remains fully GPL, I think is easier to me to consider GPL compliant, when I add a submodule over FGDATA next with submodules. If something slips, I could withdraw non-GPL material if requested by the author.

I am sending requests to indivual authors that have CC material, such as Buckaroo, Prestes, Omega95 and others to consider re-releasing under a GPL clause. But when I face with a negative, I found heartache, but again, I preffer the simpler all here is GPL appproach.

So, it has nothing to do with "github", but with "flightgear" licenses; really.

In the case of Lake of Constance; Mark was very understanding of the goals and purposes of FGMEMBERs and accepted a re-release under GPL of all his previously un-licensed material. Besides he decided to join the crew, because he saw that FGMEMBERS provided him with advantages.
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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri May 01, 2015 3:14 pm

Dear Anders

Yes. You are correct on every statement. And I have been aware of it for quite a while now.

Particularly, about divergence in aircraft repositories, when the original authors decision is to not "coordinate" the definitve status with us. Everyone knows that I provide no-guarantee over any aircraft we host. Those can be used to anyone to step in an provide some maintenance as well.

I have reviewed all your repos, and I see only one repo differs in a few "overambitious" merge leaving some files on the source tree.

I also understand about multiple repos maintenance. In your particular case, you had preferred to keep a github repo collection of your own and not be associated with FGMEMBERs. That's fine. But clearly, if you were to "associate" then you could maintain the FGMEMBERs repos instead, and it would not add any more burden to your developing strategies. As you are now, already maintaining a pure git repo on github, and creating the "releases" for FGAddon, anyways.

You probably noticed a few weeks ago, the official Github invitation to join FGMEMBERs was sent. But I understand so far you have keep a close eye on the topic, without making a limiting step.

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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri May 01, 2015 3:17 pm

Hooray wrote in Fri May 01, 2015 2:03 pm:there are tools for distributed issue tracking supported via SCMs like svn or git (usually flat files and/or meta info) - so if "submodules" are likely to be used by more and more aircraft developers, this may be worth exploring sooner or later.

http://www.cs.unb.ca/~bremner/blog/post ... -trackers/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:D ... ng_systems



Thanks Hooray
This goes in line with previous recomendations by Edward (bugman)

Currently every github's FGMEMBER repository has a "issues" list that can be tracked by anyone interested (provided he/she has a github account)
It does behave quite much as a devel-list, but it is very "topic-specific" as it relates to the aircraft in question only.

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: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby bugman » Fri May 01, 2015 3:21 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Fri May 01, 2015 3:07 pm:The point that have made me re-consider, really, is the fact that I use "the submodules" to repopulate the FGDATA with submodules repository.
You can see that Flightgear project, and inclusive FGDATA is covered broadly under GPL license. Thus all content within FGDATA is also covered this way. If I were to add repositories with an array of "free source" licenses, then the FGDATA next with submodules may be stepping beyond some legal boundary :"Example, re-licensing material that is CC under a source fully covered as GPL could be considered as re-licensing, and that may have broader legal impact.


If you check the details of the licence, you will see that this is not a problem. You are not bundling and distributing this as one unit. You are providing a framework for the user to bundle this themselves. Therefore there is absolutely no licence violation. The requirement for GPL for inclusion into FGMEMBERS is very much unnecessary.

This is very different to the official FGAddon repository where everything is neatly bundled as one unit, and hence the GPL licence is essential.
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1719
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: Cloning fgdata with GIT submodules

Postby IAHM-COL » Fri May 01, 2015 3:24 pm

Thanks Ed.

That's exactly what I have meant many times before when I had said you are such a great addition to the project.
Great insight.

I will study this situation. And If I can add other CC aircraft to the bundle, that will make me soooo happy. It will make FGMEMBERs a virtually complete collection.
Exception provided the Su-15.
But I have had private conversation with its author, where he has finalized saying that although he is not emotionally ready yet, in my behalf he will leave an open door to reconsider a more lenient re-licensing of the new aircraft.

I will study this, and again. 1000 kuddos to you.
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

PreviousNext

Return to 3rd Party Repositories

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest