World Scenery with Submodules

[SHM]

Meant the data

[IAHM-COL]

JAPAN IS UP

Hi All

As terraGIT progresses northbound, more and more world is available via github
Recently, the transfer has succesfully upload every part of the World South of n50 latitude (that is up to n40 tiles and Down)

This includes 99% of the territory of Japan, that we expect to see available for the next festival. Therefore, Japan can be now installed and enjoyed via terraGIT.

Efforts are being made to add new patches with new layouts and enhacements by the Festival development team, allowing us to enjoy a much renewed Japan on the Festival via terraGIT

I also included installation and de-installation scripts to facilitate installing the country.

TILES
Japan territory is covered by the Tiles e130n30 e140n30 and e140n40

Submodules

The following submodules are required for a complete installation of Japan

Code: Select all

Objects/e130n30
Objects/e140n30
Objects/e140n40
Terrain/e130n30
Terrain/e140n30
Terrain/e140n40


HOWTO


1. Clone the terraGIT

Code: Select all

git clone https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT/terraGIT
cd terraGIT


2. Use of the installation script

Code: Select all

install/Japan


3. Use of the deinstallation script (if you want to remove Japan locally)

Code: Select all

deinstall/Japan


4. Manual operation of the submodules (alternative to the script)

a - installing

Code: Select all

git submodule init Objects/e130n30
git submodule init Objects/e140n30
git submodule init Objects/e140n40
git submodule init Terrain/e130n30
git submodule init Terrain/e140n30
git submodule init Terrain/e140n40

git submodule update Objects/e130n30
git submodule update Objects/e140n30
git submodule update Objects/e140n40
git submodule update Terrain/e130n30
git submodule update Terrain/e140n30
git submodule update Terrain/e140n40


b - deinstalling

Code: Select all

git submodule deinit Objects/e130n30
git submodule deinit Objects/e140n30
git submodule deinit Objects/e140n40
git submodule deinit Terrain/e130n30
git submodule deinit Terrain/e140n30
git submodule deinit Terrain/e140n40

git submodule update Objects/e130n30
git submodule update Objects/e140n30
git submodule update Objects/e140n40
git submodule update Terrain/e130n30
git submodule update Terrain/e140n30
git submodule update Terrain/e140n40


Final Note

Currently the content in terraGIT is identical to terraSync, but we will attemp uploading major updates on this region for the Festival

If you clone and prepare now, you can update simply by doing

Code: Select all

git pull
install/Japan


(the install script also manages updates!)

or

Code: Select all

git pull
git submodule update


Have fun everyone!
IH=COL

[IAHM-COL]

FGMEMBERS-terraGIT: The world is up and turning



Hi ALL

TerraGIT is fully uploaded and now the whole planet (or any tile of it) is available

Currently its content is identical to the most updated Terrasync version. --but possibly not for long--

TerraGIT accepts pulls requests with any world embellishment. Be creative. Examples are (but not limited to)

• New airport layouts compiled with terragear, or fixes of flooded or underground airports
• New Models and its locations
• New Shared models and/or new shared model locations
• New Groundnet files
• New Jetway files
• New patches of terrains with updated QGis tiles
• OSM patches. --buildings, and or roads--
• OSM patches optimizations for better performaces
• Or anything else you imagine, that 's the limit!

TerraGIT will also pull new models added to Terrasync in a monthly basis. Don't hesitate to terraGIT your models first; and later request them to be terrasynced (if you wish): the merge will simply understand the files and locations already exists.

TerraGIT accepts a wider option of Models and gives greater liberty to the Artist and developer to create their own vision

I will be creating posts with examples and tutorials of how /where you add your changes and how to create the proper pull request.
Quoting the x-plane folks

Together we can build something truly spectacular, and have a lot of fun along the way.

*********

[SHM]

And the drama continues

It's a pity you can't bring yourself to collaborate on creating a unified FG terrain - but it's GPL, fork away.

[IAHM-COL]

someone trying to spark controversies? How unfit and uncommon!

In any case, I am doing all the contrary. I am inviting collaboration, and inviting people to join a combined effort, in a decentralized repository.

What's the meaning of a fork?
A fork is a great thing! a fork is someone else joining your effort, is someone else studying your code, debugging it, being an active user.

How many forks does linux have?
Github lists infinite ! https://github.com/torvalds/linux
Look at this network tree
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/network/members

Has linux died out of too many brains? Not really. on the contrary: that's its power and wealth
Does Torvalds control all those fork? Not in his wildest dream!!

I say the number of forks is proportional to the health and alive of an OpenSource project

See this

https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal
Gdal has 227 forks!!
Every fork is someone willing to hack at the code. Clean it up. Fix something that annoys him.

"La union hace la fuerza" (google it)

https://github.com/FGMEMBERS/c172p-detailed
Where do you think the c172p got the strenght from? From being a distributed project with many collaborators, everyone with his own fork. 20 and counting.

Bringing this strenght of building as a community and having more access to the infrastructe and more control of the commits, and the ability to build decentralized just brings strength to Flightgear and all the community.

Not to the power players. off course.
To them . I apologize.

[SHM]

I am with you

[IAHM-COL]

Seems someone didn't understand the argument - it's about the concept, not whether it can or can not be made to work for a single airport manually.

There was nothing manually done in the terrain generation for kansai. You input the proper terrain (from panoramia) SRTM3 to the gdalchop function, which outputs your terrain profile. then you use that in terragear to build the terrain. No "manual" adaptations.
It works with the proper set of sources, and the proper set of binaries.

As I mentioned before, I did the same in Appalachian regionals -KEBD -with equal results. Seamless boundaries noted by the lack of landclasses to match.
I did the same for Mountain View (KMNF). Same result.
No manual adaptation needed.

I also built some AFB for Maverick in the middle of Europe.

And for legoboy in Venezuela. Same result. No boundaries issues,except if landclasses differ.

No manual fixes. Everytime a success. The thing is on using the correct sources.

Even more, if you rebuild patches without recompiling terrain (gdalchop only one time and save that output) the elevation glitches can be further minimized.

Today, only thing we miss dearly is the cs0 (custom) shapefiles, gone with the wind.

***

Look even my scripts are found on the wiki --courtesy of Laserman
http://wiki.flightgear.org/User:Laserman/TerraGear

[IAHM-COL]

Proof of Concept 2

Kansas By Wllbragg

Hi ALL

I began the integration of an scenery package of the whole state of Kansas into terraGIT.
Looking at the points where the new package is coming from and revising how critical those points of border are....

It is a subjective matter indeed. but all I am seeing is differences in the land-Classes, and maybe some line thickness, and things like it. In this particular case, Wllbragg has pay unsurmountable amount of attention to detail and the result is mind-buggling beautiful, yet on the landclasses transition things are not too Bad (again. my subjective opinion)

This is an example of what I am seeing
https://drive.google.com/folderview?id= ... sp=sharing

[SHM]

But it's not terrasync vs. terragit, it's Wayne's scenery vs. the default 2.0 scenery. I know Wayne's scenery of course. Screenshots demonstrate that it's possible to generate good scenery, not that one distribution mechanism is better than the other.

Is that too hard to comprehend? There's no technical reason you couldn't see the same scenery via terrasync. It would just be more effort up-front and a lot less later.

You seem to credit the distribution mechanism for Wayne's work - and that's really a strange attitude.

Or in other words - assuming I can download the most stunning scenery ever via http (yeah, I have Martin's Grand Canyon terrain on disk which is better than even any commercial pack of the region and caused the FSX-people to go slack-yawed when it was shown on FSWeekend) - would that prove that terra-git is an inferior concept and we all have to do it via http in the future?

Because that's what you seem to be saying.

SHM
Well the idea here is simple, if you want higher quality terrain for FG use terraGit.

Its your wish. If you dont want stay away. Enjoy the stock flooded and basic layouts.

I started improving the airports in India one by one by one and uploading it to the gateway. I hope I'll see all that soon in terrasync. In terragit its simple you get all that as soon as you push it. And you can also improve the lanclass data and upload to terragit sources and it will be generated. Now that the mapserver is dead. There is unfortunately no such place to upload in a single place.

As I told the only reason why I cross posted is because I wanted the people who liked the idea to try it.

Lets stop this argument here. I really love your work on ALS and AW. They're awesome. But why dont you understand the bright side of TerraGit.

SHM


Top








Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby wlbragg » Sat Apr 23, 2016 1:10 pm

Thorsten, you are right when you break it down, that all requested conditions being met, it could just as easily be distributed in terrasync. The problem is that currently those conditions can't be met, hopefully 3.0 tools will allow for that.

I can tell you right now that my scenery will probably not be compatible with TorstenD's checklist. It is going to prove to be to detailed (heavy) for all users.

I am quickly coming to the conclusion that I might be better off to continue making my own custom scenery, state by state to my specs and if others want to do with it as they please, then so be it.

I certainly don't want even more resources split between two systems.

But in general, It could be convenient to distribute and contribute scenery in this manner with the proper over-site and cooperation. I could see a use case for it.

Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout


Top








Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby Thorsten » Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:08 pm



Well the idea here is simple, if you want higher quality terrain for FG use terraGit. (...) But why dont you understand the bright side of TerraGit.


Israel's answer: Because I don't have a clue of anything.

My answer: Because it's not really there.

When the previous terrasync solution was about to go down, this was seen as not only a challenge but as a chance and a number of changes to the future of the terrain workflow were discussed and are on the way of being implemented. A number of principles have been identified:

* The world scenery should be consistent, i.e. no floating objects etc.
* The user experience should be easy, i.e. no fiddling with direct repository access, no mutually incompatible addons
* FG needs to be verifiably GPL
* The process should be as automatic as possible in order to not tie manpower

What was identified as a problem as the turnaround cycle, i.e. that airport layouts and scenery work should appear faster. There was a viable path discussed to make that possible on terrasync.

So what could have happened is that people interested in scenery help to define and create the workflow to bring it all to terrasync.

FGMembers choose to jump on the issue.For starters we get to see lots of disinformation - the origin of the scenery gets mixed up with the distribution chain (no, I do not need a GIT solution to acquire Wayne's scenery, I can just use http download - you're celebrating yourself for copying an existing scenery to your server - which so often seems the 'achievement' of FGMembers...). The problems people with more than a decade of scenery creation and distribution have outlined are dismissed as irrelevant. Conceptual arguments (like how do you make sure that only GPL material enters the repository - especially if you have a history of copyright violations like FGMembers has?) are somehow turned into 'I have the prettier screenshot therefore my concept is better' debate.

Essentially you're encouraging users to submit objects to your database - where they'll not only not be seen by the vast majority of FG users (who do not fiddle around with repositories) but where they'll create inconsistencies down the line.

You're now discouraging users from distributing their work via terrasync where it would be easily acquired by the standard users on the grounds that it's much easier to push to your own repository (because you do none of these pesky content verification things for instance...). And of course anyone who points out that such a scheme is bound to end up in an FSX-like maze of mutually inconsistent addons is ridiculed.

Just how's that supposed to be best for the FG community? Just what about what you're doing is in the interest of the normal user? Just what is the point in trying to get people away from terrasync and a consistent, easy to support terrain?

Do we really need this new attempt to divide the community? Does anyone seriously believe that asking people to clone GIT repositories and manually merge material definitions is a viable alternative to terrasync - or do some people need to get everyone to 'their' repository no matter what?

Please just leave this forum and say whatever you want to say in your own forum. There's been enough damage.

Top








Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby jaxsin » Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:20 pm

I have read 6 pages of back and forth. While TerraGit certainly does not solve anything and probably creates more then it is worth(absolutely valid point). I see it as a reason and all the more important reason to fix the BROKEN toolchain. There is no arguing about the content of the photos, if you care that much about your POV you will find a way to view it. What was in that photo is what makes FG a complete failure to quite a large community.

Now try not to take out of context what I said. FG is not a failure, but if you had a poll of non-FG users and asked them which terrain they preferred the answer would be a slap in the face of your precious WS 2.0

Great work by Wayne and should be a huge motivating force to try and get things sorted for WS 3.0, because FG is wasting artist strength with ws 2.0

edit: Yes I know you can edit textures, GREAT! I can put the lipstick on the pig as well, but it's still a pig. Landclasses, think I heard someone say that before???


Top








Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby Thorsten » Sat Apr 23, 2016 3:31 pm



I see it as a reason and all the more important reason to fix the BROKEN toolchain.


Um... how do you think Wayne created the terrain - with the BROKEN toolchain?



Now try not to take out of context what I said. FG is not a failure, but if you had a poll of non-FG users and asked them which terrain they preferred the answer would be a slap in the face of your precious WS 2.0


And if they'd actually have to fly in the highest resolution terrain we can create - and it'd be a choice between 5 fps and 30 fps - which do you think they'd prefer then?

It's also a question of making it flyable for the average user...



Yes I know you can edit textures, GREAT! I can put the lipstick on the pig as well, but it's still a pig.


Actually, procedural techniques are so powerful that we've seriously discussed largely dispensing with all but a few landclasses and generating the rest of the structures procedurally. The point is that terrain 'is' not much except coefficients for the FDM and the weather system and pixels on the screen. As far as rendering is concerned, all there's ever going to be is lipstick. Don't fool yourself that we aim for any 'reality' underneath the pixels

[SHM]

it0uchpods » Sat Apr 23, 2016 6:39 pm

Well, will someone tell me why FGMEMBERS and TerraGit are bad for FGFS? (See bugman no swear. Do you want a medal?)

it0uchpods/ATC411

Favorite Aircraft: MD-11, MD-10, MD-88, MD-90, KC-137R
Visit it0uchpods Hanger: http://www.github.com/it0uchpods


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby PilotDjim » Sat Apr 23, 2016 6:51 pm




Bomber wrote in Sat Apr 23, 2016 5:53 pm:
2. FlightGear attracts a wide age-range of users, some of whom are quite young. Therefore the Forums are no place for obscenity or adult material. Any posts should be acceptable to a parent reading over the shoulder of their 12 year old child.

Anyone want to.talk about the average user now ?

Errr... Bomber. Who are you to dictate that? Some kinda god? I recommend you shut up and mind your own business. I am 13 and talk to 411 regularly without problem with his language as it is obviously a joke. DEAL WITH IT. It's not illegal. More of an expression.

Regards,
Djim
Chances Are, I'm Eating Cheese In A 747.
Heathrow Spotter.
Find Me On Mumble And The Community - KOL24M/G-XKOL/LAX24M
Head Of Marketing/Pilot/Route Management At LucasAir.
Visit LucasAir:http://lucasair.tk/


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby wlbragg » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:01 pm



Pages and pages of completely negative responses to an FG community contribution



Well, will someone tell me why FGMEMBERS and TerraGit are bad for FGFS?

How can you not see the harm in splitting off resources, neither system will have the sum of the whole.

I saw potential in fgmembers and also in terragit, but I also am "willing" to look at the negative aspects. In both cases there is the splitting off of resources instead of trying to enhance the current systems.

It always morphs into competition with instead of enhancement of.

Why does the conversation always get mean spirited?

Curt, you beat me to it. Or not?
Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby it0uchpods » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:04 pm

@wlbragg

I disagree, I think it allows developers and aircraft to expand.

it0uchpods/ATC411

Favorite Aircraft: MD-11, MD-10, MD-88, MD-90, KC-137R
Visit it0uchpods Hanger: http://www.github.com/it0uchpods


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby wlbragg » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:07 pm



I disagree, I think it allows developers and aircraft to expand.

It could do the same thing by insisting where possible to push new material to the core and use that to enhance the satellite, like fgmembers is doing with it's clone of fgdata. Nothing being taken away there.
Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby it0uchpods » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:19 pm




wlbragg wrote in Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:07 pm:


I disagree, I think it allows developers and aircraft to expand.

It could do the same thing by insisting where possible to push new material to the core and use that to enhance the satellite, like fgmembers is doing with it's clone of fgdata. Nothing being taken away there.

Exactly, no damage is being done to FGdata from FGMEMBERS. SINCE IT ISN'T BEING MERGED BACK IN!!!!

EXACTLY!!!!
it0uchpods/ATC411

Favorite Aircraft: MD-11, MD-10, MD-88, MD-90, KC-137R
Visit it0uchpods Hanger: http://www.github.com/it0uchpods


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby wlbragg » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:31 pm

That is not what I said. I said the fgdata part of fgmembers is doing no damage. fgmembers has aircraft that are being updated and contributed to that are not being included in fgaddon. That is harmful to core FG.

I like having a one stop shop to know that I have access to virtually every available aircraft should I ever want a certain make or model. I think of it as a backup. But I don't have the legal confidence in it that I do of the aircraft in fgaddon and any aircraft being updated directly in fgmembers that are not carried over into fgaddon is competition and not a positive in my opinion.

Kansas(2-27-15)/Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA (2-27-15), 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby it0uchpods » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:45 pm

Nooooo

You are wrong!

FGMEMBERS allows developers to work on planes that are no longer included with FGaddon.

My point. It allows the planes to not die! If the planes are GPL (which most are) you can continue working on them since they are open source!!!

How does it harm the community?

it0uchpods/ATC411

Favorite Aircraft: MD-11, MD-10, MD-88, MD-90, KC-137R
Visit it0uchpods Hanger: http://www.github.com/it0uchpods


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby Bomber » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:54 pm

I can see the harm.....

But no one see the harm in splitting the community in half by having a conversation on a mailing list and then coming here dictating the direction that's been agreed..... agreed ?.... not on here it wasn't.

Yes it's a separate issue but it actually just another part of the whole problem that's plaguing FG.

How about we look at the arrogance of the bans in the first place. .. My guess is these people that initiated the bans expected FGMEMBERS to just die on the vine... it must be gauling for it to not turn out that way.

So they bring something back, are acused of non collaboration and splitting the community. .

That's simply not justifiable.

The attack on my T4T project is yet another example.... yes it's not worked out as we'd like here at FG... colaborate? Not an easy environment in which to do that.... which my attitude is blamed. Well I'm just a single point of contact and they'd all be contributing like mad if they'd felt that our project had been treated fairly.

Contributions shold be allowed from all... be welcomed from all... it should be survival of the fittest.... if a group wishes to do something the hard way, with non automatic updates yet have the dedication to deliver a better final product for us all... who are these people that say they can't?

There's far to much draconian rules being introduced into FG of lately.

But stating my opinion is just trolling I guess.

viewtopic.php?f=49&t=17493


Top




Re: Where did the topic go?

Postby it0uchpods » Sat Apr 23, 2016 7:56 pm

I think FGMEMBERS is lovely, and I am 100% with Israel on this and TerraGit.

I don't care what you do, it will not change my mind. Period.

Regards,