Dear Everyone,

I hope this is the last time we will have to discuss this topic, since
over the last months it seemed that everyone agreed with that FGDATA

- has to be split sometime
- should be split a.s.a.p.

We agreed that after the current release of 2.4 would be a good point to
get the project on the way. As I offered and it still stands, I will
take care of writing the bash script which "splits" the current FGDATA
repository into multiple repositories and leaves an FGDATA repository
which holds merely the bare essentials which supplement the core binary
of fgfs. One could classify the contents of the new FGDATA by saying
that it's data which provides the technical backbone - the common
denominator everything is based upon.

I'd like to cease this opportunity to give everyone the chance to utter
their possible disagreement with the project or their respective
opinions and discuss the very details of the split, which have not yet
been determined.

The general boundary conditions of the splitting process are the following:

- FGDATA shall consist of everything which is essential for the binary
  to run and shall not hold any data which is specific to certain
  airports or airplanes. Those should be provided in separate
  repositories the structure of which is not of current interest and
  might possibly be chosen by the respective authors.

- The change shall not require restructuring of the architecture,
  including the directory structure. Solely the repositories in which
  the data is contained shall change.

Informatively, I'd like to supply a sensible suggestion for how a final
structure might look and how, either as a developer or user might use
it. Particularily, because some of you might wonder how we can strip
FGDATA of KSFO and the 172p, leaving nothing to fly with - isn't that a
bad decision?

Definitly not. One has to distinguish between a proper, dedicated
development structure which is aligned to and substructred into
independent development units and a way of deployment.

As a developer, you will clone the base fgfs SC repository and you will
clone the FGDATA repository. Then, depending on your field of interest
you will clone the aircrafts, airports etc. you are planning to work on.

You can do so with the git submodule, which will integrate the specific
aircraft/airport/etc repository into the existing FGDATA repository,
while keeping the commits separate.

For deployment, you either manually or programatically git-submodule all
data required for shipping into a branch for deployment. This includes,
for instance, the KSFO tile and the c172p. It's apparent that one, among
many advantages of that approach is, that the confusing redundancy
between the "default KSFO" and the "scenery KSFO", as it currently
exists, will go.

While the planes are the primary concern of the splitting and will bring
a relief of a tremendous 4.5 Gigabytes to every user of FGDATA and
rectify a lot of redundancies and confusion, other things might also be
considered, say, ./Traffic (just a lucky guess).

Practically everything which is orthogonal to the core and without which
FG (assuming a plane and a tile) can properly run, should migrate.

regards,
ManDay

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BlackBerry® DevCon Americas, Oct. 18-20, San Francisco, CA
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rim-devcon-copy2
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Reply via email to