Jari Häkkinen wrote:
I support the split if only for the reason that aircraft maintainers
will get commit rights to their private spheres in fg-land (if I
understand things properly). With the previous monolithic fgdata only a
selected group of people had commit privileges.
Maybe now,
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011, Martin Spott wrote:
Jari Häkkinen wrote:
I support the split if only for the reason that aircraft maintainers
will get commit rights to their private spheres in fg-land (if I
understand things properly). With the previous monolithic fgdata only a
selected group of people
I am happy to accept the privileges when/if I begin an aircraft project.
I even have plans for that but then again those plans are already 2
years old with no progress :)
No, currently I am happy with trying to convince the dev team to accept
my small and sporadic contributions. And with git,
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 04:21:47PM -0600, dave perry wrote:
On 10/18/2011 10:24 AM, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
- Development -
All aircraft related development shall henceforth be performed on
repositories which are maintained by the respective authors.
It is planned that most of the
On 18 Oct 2011, at 23:21, dave perry wrote:
2. Assuming the answers are no, yes, to #1, will all these repositories
be centrally located so one can track new or modified ac of interest?
3. Is there any interest in creating repositories by ac class/type?
e.g. historical,
On 10/19/2011 10:36 AM, James Turner wrote:
On 18 Oct 2011, at 23:21, dave perry wrote:
2. Assuming the answers are no, yes, to #1, will all these repositories
be centrally located so one can track new or modified ac of interest?
3. Is there any interest in creating repositories by ac
On 19 Oct 2011, at 10:15, Edheldil wrote:
Is there any written spec on this system? I got frustrated when looking
for a specific aircraft in fgrun :) and so I suggested something similar
several days ago on IRC, but it got confused with a/c rating.
If I understand you correctly, submit a/c
On 19 October 2011 19:29, Cedric Sodhi man...@gmx.net wrote:
https://gitorious.org/flightgear-aircraft
Last night, the discussion came up where the above page is slow to
load, in part it's due to 1.2MB of HTML code, plus the CSS, plus the
any images in use. Not very browser friendly. I hacked
Question on the new repository layout:
I would like to pull every aircraft from
https://gitorious.org/flightgear-aircraft/
Is there a way to do this in a single command or do I have to manually
identify each aircraft in the repository and manually clone it here? If
someone adds a new aircraft
,
Alessandro
From: curtol...@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 10:03:25 -0500
To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FGData Split Completed - a.k.a. Life after
the Split
Question on the new repository layout:
I would like to pull every aircraft from
https
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:14 AM, TDO_Brandano -
tdo_brand...@hotmail.comwrote:
Not automatically, as far as I know, but it should be relatively simple to
script this. the main issue is how to script something that will work across
platforms. I can do this in less than 20 lines of python, but
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Curtis Olson wrote:
Sure we can script it out, but do I have 2-3 days right now to fiddle with a
script? Not this week myself.
Updating aircraft repositories you have cloned should be easy enough,
a quick and dirty bash hack:
for d in my-aircraft-dir/*; do (cd $d; git
On 19 Oct 2011, at 16:27, Curtis Olson wrote:
Right now we've replaced a one-line command with several weeks of manual
work. (Or so it appears.) I understand the reasons, and we need to move
forward, but I think this is a logic gap here -- an unforeseen side effect,
and a problem we
get all the data
with a savvy combination of wget, grep and sed.
Ciao,
Alessandro
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 17:42:49 +0200
From: anders-...@gidenstam.org
To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FGData Split Completed - a.k.a. Life after
the Split
On Wed
Curtis Olson wrote:
Anyone have any good ideas?
Yes, revert the dissection of 'fgdata' until a practical solution is in
place which doesn't require lots of people to waste extra time just to
achieve the previous state which simply works for them.
Spending some thoughts on how to compensate the
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 10:48 AM, James Turner wrote:
The intention is create a super-module which has each aircraft as a
submodule. Eg an 'all-aircraft' repository, for people who want this.
Ideally someone with some scripting skills would automate creating that
repository, and then we're
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Curtis Olson wrote:
Hi James,
A super module sounds ideal if that's doable in git. Looking forward to
it! For now, maybe I have to sluff along with the aircraft from the old
fgdata repository.
Replying to myself:
Once we have a super-module for all the
combination of wget, grep and sed.
Ciao,
Alessandro
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 17:42:49 +0200
From: anders-...@gidenstam.org
To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FGData Split Completed - a.k.a. Life
after the Split
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011, Curtis Olson wrote
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Martin Spott wrote:
Curtis Olson wrote:
Anyone have any good ideas?
Yes, revert the dissection of 'fgdata' until a practical solution is in
place which doesn't require lots of people to waste extra time just to
achieve the previous state which simply
automatically.
Ciao,
Alessandro
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 18:06:24 +0200
From: jorgvanderve...@googlemail.com
To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FGData Split Completed - a.k.a. Life after
the Split
Normally windows users want everything in a 1 click download
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:03 AM, Curtis Olson wrote:
A super module sounds ideal if that's doable in git. Looking forward to
it! For now, maybe I have to sluff along with the aircraft from the old
fgdata repository.
Hi James,
One more super module question: if I start plowing through 350
On 19 Oct 2011, at 17:47, Curtis Olson wrote:
One more super module question: if I start plowing through 350 aircraft by
hand, and then next week you come out with a super module, will that require
me to redownload everything, or can that be retrofitted on top of the modules
I've already
Curtis Olson wrote:
A super module sounds ideal if that's doable in git. Looking forward to it!
Gitorious will be pleased if everybody starts pulling everything from
scratch - and developers will be pleased by Gitorious' performance when
everybody starts pulling everything from scratch.
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 11:55 AM, Martin Spott wrote:
A super module sounds ideal if that's doable in git. Looking forward to
it!
Gitorious will be pleased if everybody starts pulling everything from
scratch - and developers will be pleased by Gitorious' performance when
everybody starts
I actually lost track of who is doing what in the splitting of fgdata
but there is a tremendous response pointing out issues related to the
split. I want to express support for the splitting team.
I support the split if only for the reason that aircraft maintainers
will get commit rights to
Seems like most people are just banging their heads against the wall
trying to make a new system the same as the old, which is counter
productive and unfortunate. It is highly unlikely ANYONE needs every
single aircraft from git that they were previously forced to take,
which is the whole point of
My main point (or thought) is just that if we are going to push forward with
this split, then we need to go the whole way and make it work reasonably for
everyone. The people pushing this and doing the initial work, can't just
take it half way and then leave it because their personal concerns are
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:45 PM, Jacob Burbach jmburb...@gmail.com wrote:
Seems like most people are just banging their heads against the wall
trying to make a new system the same as the old, which is counter
productive and unfortunate. It is highly unlikely ANYONE needs every
single aircraft
Am 19.10.2011 20:45, schrieb Jacob Burbach:
Seems like most people are just banging their heads against the wall
trying to make a new system the same as the old, which is counter
productive and unfortunate. It is highly unlikely ANYONE needs every
single aircraft from git that they were
Jacob Burbach wrote:
Seems like most people are just banging their heads against the wall
trying to make a new system the same as the old, which is counter
productive and unfortunate.
I wonder by which justification you pretend to speak for a group whose
common understanding you never
On 2011-10-19 21.12, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
Another example: For the last release, we branched and tagged the
repositories and well defined states. This was OK for three repositories
(fg+sg+fgdata). Doing this manually for 300+ repos is a no and doing
this scripted calls for trouble.
But is
Curtis Olson wrote:
We are committed to git, I'm not suggesting otherwise, but the entire binary
history of the data tree is pushing 10Gb.
I'm not sure if we're talking about the same item, but the bare
repository of the entire 'fgdata' in its current state should be at
approx. 4 GByte or even
I understand there are a some cases where one might need all aircraft
to perform some specific task, and when I said unlikely ANYONE would
I could have spoken better. However for the vast majority of
developers, contributors, and testers, I have to believe it is
completely unnecessary or desired
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Martin Spott martin.sp...@mgras.net wrote:
Jacob Burbach wrote:
Seems like most people are just banging their heads against the wall
trying to make a new system the same as the old, which is counter
productive and unfortunate.
I wonder by which justification
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 04:55:28PM -0400, Jacob Burbach wrote:
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Martin Spott martin.sp...@mgras.net wrote:
Jacob Burbach wrote:
Seems like most people are just banging their heads against the wall
trying to make a new system the same as the old, which is
= IMPORTANT NOTICE TO EVERYONE INVOLVED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF FGDATA
OR AIRPLANES THEREIN =
Thanks to the concentrated effort of all people involved, most notably
Jorg - who I'd hereby like to thank on behalf of all of us, for spending
three successive days and nights branching, cloning,
Good work guys. Thanks.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
NOTE: Some aircrafts explicitly require to be inside of FGDATA, because
they are programmed to expect their own data files to be found in
FGDATA. These airplanes will give you an error if you put them outside
of
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 05:33:23PM +0100, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
NOTE: Some aircrafts explicitly require to be inside of FGDATA, because
they are programmed to expect their own data files to be found in
FGDATA. These airplanes will give
The 'fgdata'-mirror at:
http://mapserver.flightgear.org/git/gitweb.pl?p=fgdata
which previously had been maintained for it's advantageous
download performance is now frozen,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
Am 18.10.2011 18:24, schrieb Cedric Sodhi:
Next, clone the new repository of FGDATA
$ git clone git://gitorious.org/fg/fgdata-new.git fgdata
For some reason, there seems to be no ssh url available for fgdata-new
and the aircraft projects?
Torsten
Torsten wrote: For some reason, there seems to be no ssh url available for
fgdata-new
and the aircraft projects? There is. g...@gitorious.org:fg/fgdata-new.git and
for the aircraft it's like
g...@gitorious.org:flightgear-aircraft/c172p.git (all aircraft repos simply
match
the respective
Am 18.10.2011 19:30, schrieb Gijs de Rooy:
Torsten wrote:
For some reason, there seems to be no ssh url available for fgdata-new
and the aircraft projects?
There is. g...@gitorious.org:fg/fgdata-new.git
mailto:g...@gitorious.org:fg/fgdata-new.git and for the aircraft it's like
Torsten wrote:
git clone g...@gitorious.org:fg/fgdata-new data
Make sure you don't forget .git. Use this: git clone
g...@gitorious.org:fg/fgdata-new.git data
--
All the data
Am 18.10.2011 19:45, schrieb Gijs de Rooy:
Torsten wrote:
git clone g...@gitorious.org:fg/fgdata-new data
Make sure you don't forget .git. Use this:
git clone g...@gitorious.org:fg/fgdata-new.git
touche - I'm getting too old for this ;-)
It works now, thanks!
Torsten
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:33 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:24 PM, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
NOTE: Some aircrafts explicitly require to be inside of FGDATA, because
they are programmed to expect their own data files to be found in
FGDATA. These airplanes will give you an error
On 10/18/2011 10:24 AM, Cedric Sodhi wrote:
= IMPORTANT NOTICE TO EVERYONE INVOLVED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF FGDATA
OR AIRPLANES THEREIN =
Thanks to the concentrated effort of all people involved, most notably
Jorg - who I'd hereby like to thank on behalf of all of us, for spending
three
46 matches
Mail list logo
