bugman wrote in Wed May 18, 2016 4:11 pm:It's pretty simple, why does Israel not set up FGMEMBERS to have different categories:
- FGAddon mirror with no development.
- 3rd party hangar mirrors - one category for each - and no development.
- Zero-barrier development repositories as new aircraft or forks of the above.
- Encouraging new aircraft developers to contact the original aircraft authors, and help them upstream (in FGAddon or the 3rd party hangar), to hopefully form a development team around the original author. The upstream changes will then flow into the mirrors, and down into any forks.
This is very simple to change with the current design of FGMEMBERS. It would take me less than 2 hours to do With this, there will be the ability to fully automate mirror synchronisation via scripts (e.g. hourly cron jobs to very quickly mirror the changes). This goes against Israel's goal of replacing the core content infrastructure, but it does significantly improve the goals of content distribution and zero-barrier development. So why not do this? All points of conflict and resentment will then be gone.
Regards,
Edward
Edit: Here is a hint - set up FGMEMBERS aircraft to have submodules inside submodules. Then there could be a master FGMEMBERS-AIRCRAFT with the submodules FGMEMBERS-FGADDON, FGMEMBERS-PAF, FGMEMBERS-FGUK, FGMEMBERS-DEVEL, etc.
The objections are to the tactics used and the deliberate aims of minimising or completely cutting off contributions upstream to the core FlightGear infrastructure for the sole purpose of rendering it irrelevant, so that Israel can have his infrastructure as the de-facto FlightGear infrastructure. This is not something that would be of any concern for a user. But it has long term implications for the code and content developments in the FlightGear project, as it drains resources and creates deliberately constructed conflict. All of this simply comes down to how Israel very carefully designed FGMEMBERS to advance his goal of replacing the core infrastructure.
If you would like to understand the source of all FGMEMBERS conflict over the last two years, the following post by Israel highlights the only impasse to having FGMEMBERS peacefully coexist in the FlightGear development community:
See how Israel refuses to back down with the goal of having FGMEMBERS become the de-facto FlightGear content infrastructure? This is the key to everything, it is the sole impasse!
Regards,
Edward