Free Flight, Free Speech

Hi Wlbragg.

I am a bit astonished. Specially Knowing that you and I have always have good communication and you know where to look for me if needed. I -unlike others- am not trying to hide, nor am requesting secrecy vows. I am certain I don't need to pull tricks. But, still, in addition you are always welcome to email me, and I consider you my friend. And as far as I recall, have always answered you; in the most courteous manners.

(that is, Lydiot has a point. You can talk to me, and even if you need to address questions, nothing "real" prevents you to post here.)

Now. To address your concerns. (there is a long list, so bare with me)

Wlbragg wrote:@SHM, have you offered any of your recent patches that you are submitting to terraGit to the dev list for inclusion into the terrasync database?

If not, why?

Firstly, you are talking to the wrong person. You are inquiring the messenger.
SHM, as of yet, has not submitted ANY patch to terraGIT

See the repo commit history here:
https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT/t ... its/master

You will see there that SHM has not send patches, pull requests or commits. (nor accepted any; as of yet!),
Currently the only patch received by a second person in the group is KMIA by legoboy, which can be seen in the respective subrepository

https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT/w ... 73f296795a

In fact, all the recent patches that SHM had shown you (all) in the Official Forum, are patches over Japan that I made and I patched. Personally.

Now. On the second topic.

YES. It was offered via the proper channels and rejected.

I asked D-LASER and elgaton simultaneously, more than a month ago, that if they could contact Torsten Dreyer via the devel list, we wanted to push some improvements for scenery airport layouts.
The major concern was Chubu Centrair (RJGG), which lacks completely terrain and it is a 1 Rwy on the ocean. When, at the same time, an amazing patch by Horacio Contreras has existed for FG since 2010 with correct landclasses, Terrain, and astonishingly beautiful models.

I asked my friends to get a go for 2 main reasons: 1st - ly: Because I knew that the core developers would be animous toward a contribution offered by me directly, and secondly because Courtesy of C. Olson, I can not post anything to the devel.list

For the past 6 months, we were in addition preparing custom sceneries for The FlightGear festival, which was recently held in Japan. As expected, this isolated regions, the Official scenery is very suboptimal, but luckily a bigger community joined the effort of making the best work possible in multiple airports in addition to the previously existing Chubu, including Kansai, Fukuoka, Chitose, Sendai, and both Tokyo Airports. Improvements took place at all levels: 3D, 2D, xml configuration files (jetways, Groundnets), and Open Radar.

But a big piece of the puzzle was missing:
How could we update terrasync on time?

The problem is that as indicated above, the scenery development was an integral proccess, not only limited to 3D models, which is the only thing possible to upload to terrasync via the Database.


Thus, my attempt at pushing this to terrasync needed to be able to patch the content completely, but most importantly, several (15 or more) new layouts that were critical, since the originals were single runway default layouts.

D-LASER kindly responded to my petition, and sent a devel list request without revealing me.

https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/ma ... /34924035/

laserman wrote:> Catalanoic <catalanoic@... <mailto:catalanoic@...>> schrieb
> am Mi., 9. März 2016 um 20:03 Uhr:
>
> Isn't better to move the scenery devel folder to Github? As for
> another custom scenery related works are done.

I develop and test airports together with legoboy & others on github.
During the development phase it is very convenient to use git push,pull,
merge...

When the work on a static or shared model is finished, I upload it to
http://scenemodels.flightgear.org/ (terrasync)

Torsten Dreyer:
> We try hard to avoid incompatible chunks of scenery that don't match
at their corners.

I understad that goal, but it has led to 3 years of stagnation of
airport layouts. The gateway(our upstream) is full of new and improved
airport layouts. WED artists of the FG community are sad to see that
their work is not integrated in the main FG scenery.

In some cases we can just update the ICAO.btg.gz without changing
the terrain around it.

I think it would be nice to integrate D-ECHO's beautiful islands
and my OMDB to make it available for all users without the need for
extra custom scenery download and folders.

I also don't expect a significant mismatch of tiles in Asia (India,
China) when we all use the v0 shapefiles and viewfinderpanorams's
elevation data.

I know that Martin Spott wanted to avoid those little edges at all cost,
but what is the opinion of the other developers & users ?

* tolerate some tile edges far away from the airport to get a nicer,
up-to-date airport layout ?

yes or no ?

Indeed, this occur, only 16 hours after I requested my friends to interced for me to make possible to submit these scenerios to terrasync ONTIME for the Festival.

The answer to your question is:
Yes. We (or I) have exhausted all mechanisms to make contributions to the core.

Wllbragg wrote:Is it because in terraGit you don't have to ask anyone for permission, you just push what you want when you want to?
Or is it because you prefer git to svn?

You are looking at this through a very tiny hole and missing the whole picture.

Terrasync is a repository (svn) that grants no-one writting privileges (very few have it, maybe only a couple of people).

FG has structured Scenery around the idea that the only thing that is needed to update/grow is the 3d models, for what the database exists.
Anything else until very recently never had a way to reach upstream

I mention thinks we create in the community like groundnets, or Jetways configs, or new layouts. You name it. If it is not a 3d model or a shared location, there is not a mechanism that exist to push those improvements forward.
Lately, Torsten had offered to receive patches via the devel.list

It's mostly uncertain what he pushes and what he leaves. Besides, he really work against himself by giving himself all the responsibility and he is a busy man spending hours on FG. He rarely will have time to push a Groundnet (and surely he is not comfortable with one untested!)
So that's that. Things, even now fall thru the cracks.

I wont deny my preference over git. Quoting myself

IAHMCOL in the USA tour thread for "From Russia with Love wrote:When it comes to subversion, I am rather subversive!

Git vs SVN, we will come back to this one. But basically the technical differences are enormous, and the fact you don't really see them, in my opinion means you are buoyant on this topic now and seem unable to touch bottom.

With the git system I implemented (terraGIT) adding and implementation changes to scenery is easy for anyone to contribute (jetways, groundnets, OSM buildings, Project 3000 or other shared model location, and new 3d models etc ... check check.. check)

Anyone can fork, improve and submit a PR via github.
We are one click away of instantly benefit.

It's the perfect opposite of: If thorsten did not have the time to review, edit, approve, submit to terrasync; then changes are non possible.
(even the simpler ones, like groundnets I say again)

So: Why wouldn't I like the alternative that makes thing possible over the "no-way" alternative the core offers until now?

wlbragg wrote:There must be a reason you prefer pushing to terraGit VS pushing to terrasync svn?

Yes.
Many.
But take one: I cannot push to svn (terrasync). Can you, directly? can you name a person that can, except T. Dreyer?
[and that is willing too? -- I need that inside information]

I often wonder if someone such as yourself volunteered to update the svn terrasync repo like you are doing to the git repo, if you would be allowed to make those corrections/improvements. Did you ever ask?

Yes. Indirectly I asked.
and the answer was this:

https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/ma ... /34924793/

T. Dreyer answering Laserman in the devel list, negating us the possibilty of fastly pushing Japan wrote:No (my vote). Not everybody is flying traffic patterns. How does it look
from high altitude?

I am not agains a new scenery strategy but I hat to see a patchwork-style
planet one day.

The vision of having a solid tool chain generating a world scenery from a
detailed and common database is what I am after.
Lets avoid gaps, elevation steps, overlapping and incompatible scenery
tiles and work together on a one-fits-all scenery.

Until we have that, here is my suggestion:
Somebody provides self-contained and tested chunks of Terrain to be merged
into Terrasync. That "somebody" is responsible for the usability of that
terrain chunk.
By "provide" I mean
- make it available by rsync, tarball or anything else to be fetched,
unpacked into terrasync without human interaction.
- Work out a method to discover new or outdated chunks
- Work out a method how to tell scenemodels-db which objects need new
elevations
- Somehow "sign" the chunk so we have somebody who gurantees GPL
compatibility
- Work out a method how to avoid mutual exclusive changes (one person
updating EDFE, another improving EDDF [both share a tile])
Not everything need to be ready in detail but I'd like at least have an
idea how this should work.

What I will not accept is: Follow some dropbox / gg-drive links, unpack an
archive, guess what it might be, remove all side effects, do some hours of
test flying, resetting object elevations by guessing the area etc. etc.

That answer was an end of the deal. Because I can't satisfy such stringest requirements yet.
The conflicts he mention there exits are are latent in terraGit, such as the tile boundaries, and the fact that the database doesnt get updated.

He throw the ball too far, and I couldn't reach it. Goal! Torsten 10 - Israel 0



That's that. Of all his claims the only I can guarantee is GPL compliance. And he doesn't take it from me

Was it the very act of having to ask for permission that was the barrier to contributing to the project using official procedures?

I disagree. Everytime I had asked. The barrier is just emotional. Torsten.

Even the scenery database closed the doors. I updated the Horacio Contreras Chubu scenery in a way that was fit to the database.
The database form is very tricky. You need to make sure of many things: 1) each building is a model. 2) texture namespace, 3) texture size, 4) no texture reusage between models. 5) need of a thubmnail.

I have passed all the informatic filters. And the consequence is that since Geneve was ill-talked, Vicmar felt that a submission by me needed extra layers of revision, which opened the door to Torsten to excuse a rejection.

https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/34934069/

One day later, the models were rejected. And never allowed to be resubmitted by elgaton (when he tried to contact via Private emails to Torsten)


https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/ma ... /34936995/

Thanks for all your responses,

after a some privat emails we decided to reject the submissions. The
reasons were:
- The Models use high resolution textures not adequate for our database
- The Models were copies or derivates of work found here:
http://www.grafikavirtual.com/fgfs/?sec=escenarios.php
- The author refused to cooperate


Torsten

I attempted many times to explain the reasoning of why the submission was correct, and how there was not a performance drop. Vicmar concluded that I was just pestering, and announced me that any further communication of me to the FlightGear Scenery database is sent directly to the trash

Therefore, you can't ask me to submit models. I cant.

I'm honestly curious about this because the way you describe events seem angry with the "official" system and the comparisons you keep making of work you commit to terraGit but choose not to contribute to terrasync svn is odd in the simple fact that you could have just as easily submitted the work to terrasync and not terraGit and made the same comparison but with terrasync being the preferred promotion.

You completely misinterpreted SHM.

That's very sad. And it is sad you expressing to him in this manner. Specially after he withdraw from the Forum due to the biased (and repited) moderations that clearly placed Thorsten as "more important" than him.

If a person leave the room: Why would you insist ill=speaking of them?

Now. About SHM.
He is one of the most enthusiastic persons in Flightgear I know of. He is eager to learn and to contribute. And nothing he wishes more than to see his contributions reaching fruition in FG and enjoyed by the community at large.

He has improved himself in layout generations. In 3d modelling, and now working his ways on QGis.

And it is completely understandable that he was un-excited about all this before, knowing that his work had very little luck to be featured in terrasync. We have been waiting for long time to see the work on the layouts coming to terrasync. Therefore, what he once expressed me was frustation. Not anger. He told me: Why do you want us to make layout for Japan, if these wont be seen?

I told him that the Festival was so far away (6mos) that for sure the terrasync ws3.0 would be generated. I lost that prediction.

But I was able to provide a method of distributing scenery that allowed his work to be feature (He did not made patches, I did)
and all the layouts were suddenly there for people to admire in the Festival and for people to know the kind of work SHM was able to do.

As soon as he saw terraGIT, he saw the full potential, and thus his frustation changed to excitement. Which reflected in his beginning of a project to cover the whole India, where every airport is undeveloped!

So, why would you say that a person that is so enthusiastic about the project is Angry?!

Don't put him down. Find ways to boost his confidence.

As you know, the layouts are being pushed to the gateway, and thus, one day they will be in terrasync as well.

And I have talked to him about the landclasses and he understands the importance of releasing those GPL, which means they will be available for FG to build the WS3.0 with them

So, we all can only benefit of his enthusiasm. And we all can only loose if Thorsten pulls him away. as he did with Gilberto Agostinho.

That's the part I don't understand, you can't submit the great work your doing to terrasync?

Well.. you tell us how?!
he makes landclasses, and airports layouts.

He pushes the layouts to the gateway, thus contributing in the long run to terrasync, while he gets to test and evaluate his work with terraGIT and gets people to enjoy it much faster.

The landclasses will be GPL and they will be available for FG to use if they choose to.

How can SM contribute more promptly to terrasync? .. again. Tell us how?!

I am confused by your unwillingness to "wait" for airports to get fixed in terrasync causing you to correct them yourself but only because you can submit them to terraGit instead of terrasync.

Again, he was not encouraged or enthusiastic about making such work because the time it took to see a result.
Now with terraGIT, he is encouraged, and working on landclasses all day long, and submitting layouts.

Now, that he sees his progress via terraGIT he will have no problem waiting for the eras to see his work coming to terrasync as well. He is NOW willing to wait as long as necessary.

So I am back to the barriers you must have felt in being able or allowed to contribute to terrasync?

The barriers are unfrankeable. He can't contribute to terrasync in the current status-quo.
All he can do is create sources, make them available and wait.

So that's why he does that, and at the same time, he enjoys his work faster via terraGIT

But your (and Thorsten) unfriendly attitude keep pulling people interested in cooperate away from the project. How about just cheer-lead them a little instead?