Melchior wrote:
> * Stuart Buchanan -- Thursday 29 November 2007:
> > I wonder if it would be worth moving all the aircraft to a
> > separate repository.
>
> That would mean to download 1 GB of *unchanged* aircraft data just
> for the reorganization. I'm not thrilled. (Unless someone offers
> a CVS "skeleton". And a script which deals with the time stamps?)
... and it's only going to get worse as more/bigger aircraft are introduced.
Yes, it might be painful. However, I think it is something that we are
going to have to do at some point, and it is much better to do it now,
rather than later, when the Aircraft directory contains 300 aircraft and
is 2GB in size.
The reason I think this is worth doing now, is that I think that 0.9.11 is
going to be a very popular release, and will add to the interest in FG and
bring on board new aircraft designers. Putting the resource in place now
seems a good idea.
I know very little about CVS, but I would have though one could write some
sort of script that would re-write all the repository locations. But I guess on
the server side moving to a new repository will not retain timestamps.
An alternative would be to create a new repository for new aircraft. This would
at least help with the problem. We could then possibly migrate the old aircraft
onto it gradually as major updates were made.
-Stuart
___________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it
now.
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper
from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going
mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future.
http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
