Voluntarily retired from Curt's forum
Posted: Sun May 08, 2016 6:35 pm
SHM wrote:Richard wrote:I've been watching the progress you're making with your scenery and its looking good. The purpose of my post was to ensure that it was clear what the official procedure was for anyone not aware of this procedure.
Thanks. Ok I got that.
Richard wrote:If TerraGit can update from TerraSync, do you think it is a better idea to update TerraSync - as that way the tens of thousands of FlightGear pilots[1] not on the forums will benefit, not just the elite few who can operate git.
If I remember correctly, WS 2.0 was released somewhere near the end of 2013. Now its almost 2 and half years since and still there are many broken airports. If terrasync had corrected it, TerraGit would have not been founded. We're just aiming on fixing what is broken.
If terraGit was not there I probably wouldn't have started on developing the scenery for India nor would I have taken interest in the development of any other airports/places, because if I cant see my work soon and have to wait for years it just doesn't give any reason to continue.
Fritz had asked whether a list of airports was maintained anywhere, I just pointed it out to thejabberwocky.net since that is where I am maintaining it.
And we were even caught offguard yesterday during the festival when we saw many pilots having the TerraGit scenery, so I guess people wouldn't mind using Git if the end result they get is worth trying. P.S there is git GUI which can make it even easy.
since September last year I have observed over 8300 different MP usernames flying the 777-300ER
That is a pretty impressive statistic data.
Thorsten wrote:Sure, we had a perfectly valid infrastructure to develop and distribute aircraft, including all the GPL complicance checks and procedures to verify some degree of consistency of things like key bindings across aircraft - and some people felt a GIT repository needed to be forked anyway (as far as I can see, mostly to get around the GPL complicance checks...)
The infrastructure to correct airports is perfectly valid (an SVN repository can accept commits), the problem of airport layouts has been recognized and updates are accepted. That has been announced quite a bit before TerraGit. Yet again some people felt they needed to have their own fork.
What's independent of the repository structure (GIT vs. SVN) in all cases is that someone actually has to build the scenery, check it, sign to guarantee GPL complicance and submit it to the repository before it can be used in any GPL licensed project.
So anyone with the ability to do these things can obviously submit the scenery to a repository. The only choice is whether to submit to the GIT repository with ~50 users or terrasync with > 20.000 users. And whether to go through GPL compliance checks or not.
Which is why your statement is just another piece of disinformation.
Thorsten
SHM wrote:Isnt this your statement all the time. GPL violation GPL violation
<A pic of a person yawning>
Last edited by bugman on Sun May 08, 2016 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Deliberate provocation on a civilised public forum is not acceptable.
Thorsten wrote:If you can't recognize the importance of avoiding copyright violations, then you've got a problem, not I.
But since we're at it, let me deconstruct that one, because it's really astonishing:
If terrasync had corrected it, TerraGit would have not been founded.
In other words, if feature X is desirable but not implemented by others, the solution is to create a fork and do it yourself. Not to just contribute to a solution. Not to initiate a discussion and see if a solution is found - no - fork away and do whatever you like.
If I had used that argument with rendering reasonable fog, we'd now have 'Flightgear ALS + AW'. Which wouldn't support MP at all, because, hey - I don't do MP, not interested. There'd also be 'Flightgear Rembrandt'. 'Flightgear ALS + AW' however could also not run the higher resolution scenery, because that required some core changes which I couldn't have made. So we'd have 'Flightgear hires scenery capable' (which probably could do MP as well) - but not ALS, AW or Rembrandt.
See the picture? We'd have ended up with about a hundred, partially compatible, partially incompatible FG forks. For a normal user, trying to run hires scenery in MP using ALS (which 'just works' with the FG we have created) would be impossible. Whereas if everyone would have used your type of 'reasoning', we'd have this huge mess.
Now, there's a good general principle to evaluate actions called the Categorical imperative: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.
So - unless you think that everyone who misses a feature should create a fork (and a huge incompatible mess in the process) - YOU shouldn't do it either - you should do the reasonable thing and work together with everyone else to create one single framework.
Of course, as long as all others cooperate and contribute to a single framework, you can usually get away looking better by not playing nice (that's mathematically formulated in the Prisoner's dilemma if you're interested). Of course, if everyone does the same, it's misery a hundred times for everyone. Which is what a great thinker like Kant realized and was out to prevent - the right thing to do for everyone is not to maximize your short term gain, it is co-operation for the greater good of everyone.
Think for a minute what the state of FG would be if everyone would do his own fork for every new feature.Think hard if you can.
<I wrote a post which got deleted>
Mr. Bug wrote:As a moderator, I have deleted the last couple of unacceptable posts. If this inappropriate behaviour continues, I will have to lock this thread to prevent it from degenerating any further.
SHM wrote:Explain inappropriate.
All I said was Thorsten wasnt subject to moderation like I was though he clearly violated. Be a man and keep this post here.Thorsten wrote:Think hard if you can.
It is also a "Deliberate provocation of others on a civilised public forum is not acceptable behaviour."
I am out of here anyway.
If anybody needs me contact me via email or at thejabberwocky.net or I will usually be on mumble.
Goodbye
SHM
