World Scenery with Submodules

[SHM]

polemics again ?

Believe me, I certainly understand more about decentralized and distributed systems than you do, remember, I am the one who walked you through git, and cvs before that, right ?

Maybe that's where your interpretation of previous discussions is failing you, have you considered that ?

Frankly, I didn't exclude any information deliberately - so feel free to add/quote whatever you think is missing, what you are referring to is certainly not part of the postings I quoted.

However, I don't think this is about finding a developer to implement such ideas - as we can see currently, we are already facing quite a problem, and if some "3rd party" could solve that problem, before we can, it's pretty clear where this is headed, i.e. an unfortunate direction for the project.

And that has zero to do with fgmembers or the people behind it - I also don't appreciate their language/attitude (and certainly not what I just read on their public forum about us), but they still got a point, and it is supported by statements made by some of the most senior contributors - as a community, we just tend to have the knee jerk reaction to disregard certain unpopular feedback if it's not coming from the right people (i.e. people with the same seniority/expertise).

Right now, we are seeing where this can lead us - some of the key people abandoning the project and using power games to "pull" their work of ... basically a whole decade.

People want to feel respected, and listened to, and that has nothing to do with fgmembers - look at examples like mfranz or martin now, if they aren't getting the impression that people are listening to them, they will move on - which is not so much unfortunate for them, but unfortunate for the project as a whole, especially if they hold the keys to key-infrastructure/data.

Quite frankly, that's one of the reasons why I suggested to contribute some of your FlightGear related graphics articles to $FG_ROOT/Docs, because I remember that you ended up deleting dozens, if not hundreds, of your screenshots in response to a forum debate and your announcement to leave the forum behind.

And others have done the same thing with articles, images and even videos and, as you know, aircraft.

We cannot always get others to agree with us, but pulling our contributions (in whatever form) leaves a very bad taste - especially once key contributors are doing that. As you know, Curt has in the past complied with requests to even remove GPL'ed materials from the repositories (GrTux) - we're empowering people by allowing these things to happen.

Striving for a decentralized and distributed mapserver setup, along the lines of what Torsten encouraged to discuss, would address this without having to do much with fgmembers or the concerns you expressed.

Honestly, unless you have suddenly read a book on distributed systems, I would politely suggest to tread more carefully here.

The number of people, and key contributors, who are abandoning or have already abandoned, FlightGear is obviously increasing each year, and in some cases, there's quite some collateral damage left behind.

[SHM]

Will we also host the shape files?

SHM

[IAHM-COL]

yes. I think we ought to githubify shapefiles and compiled elevation profiles (SRTMs), in repositories named tile-source
like

e000n00-sources.

This way, when you rebuild any piece of world, if using the same content you will get patches of earth compatible with the previous one, as in you can seamlessly merge.

I've got the v0map but Martin's cs0 shapefiles are lost (apparently for good, read Hooray very correct review above).

Currently walking our way to cover the world in github, from the south pole up. We are done up to s30 longitude and below. It's a large database, and to githubify (it takes lots of time for transfer down/up), it is needed some re-engineering. but its going solid

[IAHM-COL]

Well in fact since computing rolled an "allnighter" we are now solid on 20 degrees south and below (included all longitude s30 and below)

https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT/t ... er/Terrain

(20 degrees to the equator, and south will b ready)

[IAHM-COL]

@SHM: Sorry, as I said, I have better things to do than this. Please refer to the mailing list archives yourself.

Quite frankly, that's one of the reasons why I suggested to contribute some of your FlightGear related graphics articles to $FG_ROOT/Docs, because I remember that you ended up deleting dozens, if not hundreds, of your screenshots in response to a forum debate and your announcement to leave the forum behind.


Quite frankly, please respect that I own copyright for stuff I create, and in some cases I consciously decide not to license GPL but reserve all rights - especially where it concerns things which are not crucial for FG. And respect that I will continue to pull yet more screenshots from this forum whenever I think they're obsolete - only what I upload to the wiki or the project page will be archived. I do not share the opinion that all I say and do need to be available for all eternity, I prefer to select myself, thank you very much.

Maybe that's where your interpretation of previous discussions is failing you, have you considered that ?


I guess I'm done with being insulted in this thread as well, please find someone else to talk to.

You see, again it is just a cry to the sky to "own" what he does not. His work continues a GPL project, and as long as he is Bundling it, remains GPL, and thus he can't cry I own restrictive material. He has copyright, but not right to restrict the bundled.
He could make a non-bundle patch, and have the law apply to him, instead of being lawless --so he thinks!

More clearly, you know others have made patches under non-GPL. and say, install with these restrictions. That's fine.
But you can't, per example take Buck's Optica and changed to GPL with 2 or 3 new nasal files saying "now I also have copyright". This is not how the world works!

So, yes, long ago, I kiss his mistaken sorry good bye, but he keeps saying non-sense.

Hooray has spoken wisely, and Thorsten is left wordless, to claim falsehoods.

[SHM]

Yeah looks like Thorsten is out of ammo

Nice progress with TerraGit Israel

SHM

[jwocky]

Time to think about Skynet and a launcher again ...

[IAHM-COL]

Thanks SHM

To tell the thru is going much faster than I ever imagined. I have to gain knowledge in something cool, now

I just learn how to unleash the fury of real parallel computing in Linux multicore multithread. It is mind bugging and awesome to see. and easy to operate

More info: http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/103920/parallelize-a-bash-for-loop

[IAHM-COL]

Time to think about Skynet and a launcher again ...

[IAHM-COL]

Well said Hooray.
I am wondering if whether after you were call "the useless fat", that slap-bitched you back into reason!

In any case, you are speaking as a perfectly well informed gentleman.

@SHM: Sorry, as I said, I have better things to do than this. Please refer to the mailing list archives yourself.

It's funny to point me to the mailing list archives, most people around here (especially those complaining about the degree of quoting going on on the wiki) would assume that I am quite familiar with them.
I appreciate that you have better things to do than this, I guess we all have, yet you opted to speak up in a discussion about decentralizing the scenery development/distribution process and making it distributed.
You made/make it sound like none of the arguments are valid, while recent incidents are proving the opposite - and despite the single person handling all this work now, Torsten, stating explicitly that he's pursuing an approach that is distributed - in fact, he even went as far as using the following title for his posting: Continous, Distributed Generation of Terrain

Torsten specifically mentioned BOINC, which is distributed and decentralized by design, so it is pointless to rip apart statements made by certain users, just because we don't like their language or their attitude.

The point is valid, and was valid even long before they made their postings here - as Torsten's statements are proving, and even psadro_gm himself said explicitly, that's unsure about the future of scenery development (TerraGear/TerraSync and the MapServer).

Personally, I am not particularly impressed with the approach suggested, but it would still be better than having nothing in place, and certainly better than introduccing another single point of failure. For some reason, you completely ignore that literally had to be spoon-fed cvs/git basics by this community a few years ago, and are now speaking up in an authoritative way on these matters - while I am not seeing much to suggest that you know more about distributed and decentralized systems than the fgmembers folks (and possibly even less than that).

We are shooting down the messenger here, because we don't like the message, and because we have a history with the messenger...

Either way, I don't know where you notion of being "insulted" comes from - if you are referring to any of my postings, I can assure you that I didn't mean to insult you, and that I am quite sure that I didn't insult you at all - if in doubt, you can click the ! symbol next to my posting and report it to the moderation team to have it peer reviewed by a moderator, so that it can be edited/censors if you are right.

Otherwise, I assume that you are just using your usual rethorics to get out of a debate that doesn't quite suite you - which is obviously fine, but please, don't suggest that I have insulted you, thank you very much for that.

I do not share the opinion that all I say and do need to be available for all eternity, I prefer to select myself, thank you very much.

Which is obviously also fine, and while we did have some forum users who ended up deleting their forum postings when they left, moderators/admins are usually quick to lock their accounts - so it's not exactly a practice, or a particularly safe assumption, that is feasible for people participating in a public platform like the forum, and certainly not the devel list. In fact, most forums have a built-in mechanism to upload images, and it is generally frowned upon for people to edit their postings/threads just to revoke their contents/contributions.

As you can probably tell, I am not particularly fond of such power games, because we're empowering the wrong people with these actions.

You mentioned copyright, and my real concern here is that a certain attitude may end up crippling FlightGear as a platform, just because a certain contribution, out mutual respect for former contributors, may get pulled without further notice - it's a fine line to be walked, if you reserve to draw the veto card whenever something/someone doesn't fit you, as we are currently seeing in the mapserver department....

While a lack of a mapserver/scenery data certainly is a big deal, I don't want to imagine a future FlightGear where contributions like AW, ALS, EarthView and/or the SpaceShuttle get pulled, "out of mutual respect", just because someone managed to offend you in some major way, that would deal quite a mighty blow to the project, and it has nothing to do with copyright - fgmembers, and even FPS Pro, is a comparatively small problem in comparison to important contributors acting that way - if in doubt, refer to Torsten's comments regarding Martin's decision making ...