Oh, and do not let you be persuadated by your master Curt in private mails. Make your own choice for once, man.
Kind regards, Vincent
Responding to Wllbragg
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
Well, Vincent, once more you underestimated the dynamics of dictatorships and especially if someone has made himself the mouthpiece of a dictatorship, he feels like he has no choice but to show absolute loyalty. He can't just go somewhere, he has to fear, his "allies" and "friends" will drop him and for what he has done in the past, he may fears, he is not very popular in other places. He doesn't understand, that he will not be banned for different opnions here, he was so long caught in a dictatorship, he can't even imagine that.
Free speech can never be achieved by dictatorial measures!
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
I see Thorsten also made some sort of statement of what he wants to achieve by this discussion.
https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=29559&start=240#p285581
Unfortunately he too states what he does not want, and not what and how he wants it. Let's see what he does not want.
* certain language
* recruiting
* fear of copyright infringement
* honesty about advantages and disadvantages of the alternative approach (this is actually a pro-active one, yet the how is missing)
Let me try to turn this a little more pro-active and find some solutions for these unwanted things.
Language is a cultural thing, limited by taboos. If we would add up all taboos of all cultures, then language becomes impractically meager. So i'd suggest a more practical approach. Cultures that have a problem with another cultures language, can always ask nicely if the other wants to use less of such language, accompanied with some sort of valid explanation. I am sure the other will be kind enough to do his best. But just "i do not like it" will not be enough, i am afraid.
What is recruiting? Talking about your work and showing a reference to texts you have written about it, or the work itself? I really see not more than that happening on the other forum. Demanding that such thing must only happen in a certain topic is a bit odd. The thought of your work can popup in any conversation. I am not really sure how that can be solved (if actually necessary).
Copyright should not be an issue anymore since fgmembers set up their own development environment. It is now their responsibility to make a mess or not. If you are afraid of something, then just let your better scrutiny go over it while importing a plane.
Telling about advantages and disadvantages could be done in some statement up front the forum. Would that be good enough?
In the post after that, Bugman goes in the overdrive of emotional demands. I hope btw, that the list will not become endless if everyone wants to add his little grudges.
* He does not want "Israel's goal". Well, i am sorry Bugman, but we can hardly know and surely not control what is on someones mind.
* He does not want fgmembers to demand changes in stuff like fgaddon. I think you are confusing the situation before fgmembers was forced to split off, and the situation there after. When there was still hope that the fgmembers way could be implemented within fgaddon, yes, that would surely mean request for change. But now they are separate, there is not really any reason to request for change, is there? At least i do not see it being done nowadays.
Kind regards, Vincent
https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=85&t=29559&start=240#p285581
Unfortunately he too states what he does not want, and not what and how he wants it. Let's see what he does not want.
* certain language
* recruiting
* fear of copyright infringement
* honesty about advantages and disadvantages of the alternative approach (this is actually a pro-active one, yet the how is missing)
Let me try to turn this a little more pro-active and find some solutions for these unwanted things.
Language is a cultural thing, limited by taboos. If we would add up all taboos of all cultures, then language becomes impractically meager. So i'd suggest a more practical approach. Cultures that have a problem with another cultures language, can always ask nicely if the other wants to use less of such language, accompanied with some sort of valid explanation. I am sure the other will be kind enough to do his best. But just "i do not like it" will not be enough, i am afraid.
What is recruiting? Talking about your work and showing a reference to texts you have written about it, or the work itself? I really see not more than that happening on the other forum. Demanding that such thing must only happen in a certain topic is a bit odd. The thought of your work can popup in any conversation. I am not really sure how that can be solved (if actually necessary).
Copyright should not be an issue anymore since fgmembers set up their own development environment. It is now their responsibility to make a mess or not. If you are afraid of something, then just let your better scrutiny go over it while importing a plane.
Telling about advantages and disadvantages could be done in some statement up front the forum. Would that be good enough?
In the post after that, Bugman goes in the overdrive of emotional demands. I hope btw, that the list will not become endless if everyone wants to add his little grudges.
* He does not want "Israel's goal". Well, i am sorry Bugman, but we can hardly know and surely not control what is on someones mind.
* He does not want fgmembers to demand changes in stuff like fgaddon. I think you are confusing the situation before fgmembers was forced to split off, and the situation there after. When there was still hope that the fgmembers way could be implemented within fgaddon, yes, that would surely mean request for change. But now they are separate, there is not really any reason to request for change, is there? At least i do not see it being done nowadays.
Kind regards, Vincent
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic. ... 70#p285649
[tldr] No. It will not be considered [/tldr]
HAHA
You made me laugh.
FGMEMBERS is a collection of development repositories. It is and will be used for development. Forget about asking me to freeze development for your gain
Verbatim: FGMEMBERS is a collection of development repositories. It is and will be used for development. Forget about asking me to freeze development for your gain
That exists by implementation for Github. It is the fork button. If you are unfamiliar, this is how it looks like:
Aircraft developers in FGMEMBES are free as in FREEDOM. I don't need to tell them how to do, where to do. Those that want to contact authors, can do. Those that want to just commit and move on: Can do. Those that want to commit in SVN and in FGMEMBERS simultaneously, can do.
I have ZERO control in what every author decides to do, and I am not there to tell them there is "a way", and "not other"
Contrary to you, I never disuade anyone to contribute to FGADDon. They can. Some FGMEMBERS do (even have direct access), others send devel list emails for new aircrafts they make to be considered. As free users, they can procceed as they wish.
The only think I encourage them is to develop and collaborate, and make planes better. But again, they are free to just use the planes, and enjoy FG as well.
___
Keep in mind, I don't need the current status quo to change. I just find absurd that you guys call the group a hostile fork. And then cry that the "mods" are not moving upstream (think TNCM, or whatever).
There are 2 ways, really. 1) automatic sync of the content. I can shoulder that work because it is easy (and you already said you don't know howto). or 2) if you wish to cherry pick, then that's slave work, you shoulder it yourself.
Nothing in FGMEMBERS is non-open, so you feel free to take what you want.
I am not making additional steps for a cherrypick strategy, including,, but not limited writing to a devel list I CANNOT WRITE because Curtis courteously blocked my email address.
I hope it is clear.
Best,
IH-COL
Bugman wrote:Rather than repeat most in full, I'll point back in this thread to: viewtopic.php?f=85&t=29559&start=240. It's pretty simple, why does Israel not set up FGMEMBERS to have different categories:This is very simple to change with the current design of FGMEMBERS. It would take me less than 2 hours to do
- FGAddon mirror with no development.
- 3rd party hangar mirrors - one category for each - and no development.
- Zero-barrier development repositories as new aircraft or forks of the above.
- Encouraging new aircraft developers to contact the original aircraft authors, and help them upstream (in FGAddon or the 3rd party hangar), to hopefully form a development team around the original author. The upstream changes will then flow into the mirrors, and down into any forks.
With this, there will be the ability to fully automate mirror synchronisation via scripts (e.g. hourly cron jobs to very quickly mirror the changes). This goes against Israel's goal of replacing the core content infrastructure, but it does significantly improve the goals of content distribution and zero-barrier development. So why not do this? All points of conflict and resentment will then be gone.
Regards,
Edward
Edit: Here is a hint - set up FGMEMBERS aircraft to have submodules inside submodules. Then there could be a master FGMEMBERS-AIRCRAFT with the submodules FGMEMBERS-FGADDON, FGMEMBERS-PAF, FGMEMBERS-FGUK, FGMEMBERS-DEVEL, etc.
[tldr] No. It will not be considered [/tldr]
HAHA
You made me laugh.
1. FGAddon mirror with no development.
FGMEMBERS is a collection of development repositories. It is and will be used for development. Forget about asking me to freeze development for your gain
2. 3rd party hangar mirrors - one category for each - and no development.
Verbatim: FGMEMBERS is a collection of development repositories. It is and will be used for development. Forget about asking me to freeze development for your gain
3. Zero-barrier development repositories as new aircraft or forks of the above.
That exists by implementation for Github. It is the fork button. If you are unfamiliar, this is how it looks like:
4. Encouraging new aircraft developers to contact the original aircraft authors, and help them upstream (in FGAddon or the 3rd party hangar), to hopefully form a development team around the original author. The upstream changes will then flow into the mirrors, and down into any forks.
Aircraft developers in FGMEMBES are free as in FREEDOM. I don't need to tell them how to do, where to do. Those that want to contact authors, can do. Those that want to just commit and move on: Can do. Those that want to commit in SVN and in FGMEMBERS simultaneously, can do.
I have ZERO control in what every author decides to do, and I am not there to tell them there is "a way", and "not other"
Contrary to you, I never disuade anyone to contribute to FGADDon. They can. Some FGMEMBERS do (even have direct access), others send devel list emails for new aircrafts they make to be considered. As free users, they can procceed as they wish.
The only think I encourage them is to develop and collaborate, and make planes better. But again, they are free to just use the planes, and enjoy FG as well.
___
Keep in mind, I don't need the current status quo to change. I just find absurd that you guys call the group a hostile fork. And then cry that the "mods" are not moving upstream (think TNCM, or whatever).
There are 2 ways, really. 1) automatic sync of the content. I can shoulder that work because it is easy (and you already said you don't know howto). or 2) if you wish to cherry pick, then that's slave work, you shoulder it yourself.
Nothing in FGMEMBERS is non-open, so you feel free to take what you want.
I am not making additional steps for a cherrypick strategy, including,, but not limited writing to a devel list I CANNOT WRITE because Curtis courteously blocked my email address.
I hope it is clear.
Best,
IH-COL
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
Can I ask a question?
If all they want is a mirror of FGdata over here that's uneditable .
All we want is a mirror of FGdata over here that is editable.
They want a mirror of all 3rd party repositories that is uneditable.
All we want is a mirror of 3rd part repositories that is editable GPL permitting.
How hard is that.... I mean once that's done haven't you rather taken the wind out of their sails.
They mention nothing about upstream updates.... so they still have that problem.
When I say mirror I mean in the way you've done it so far.
Simon.
PS please don't talk massively git svn technical on me... it ain't my bag
If all they want is a mirror of FGdata over here that's uneditable .
All we want is a mirror of FGdata over here that is editable.
They want a mirror of all 3rd party repositories that is uneditable.
All we want is a mirror of 3rd part repositories that is editable GPL permitting.
How hard is that.... I mean once that's done haven't you rather taken the wind out of their sails.
They mention nothing about upstream updates.... so they still have that problem.
When I say mirror I mean in the way you've done it so far.
Simon.
PS please don't talk massively git svn technical on me... it ain't my bag
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchell
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
Making mirrors is not hard at all.
You copy the content, archive and close the repo to not receive changes.
I am not interested in mirroring their content. If someone wants their content, they can go straigth to the source to copy it. Right?
FGMEMBERS is a development area. We copy the content and its GPL license, and then use it for developing. Not a mirror, itself.
Not intended to be. On the contrary is intended to create an space where we can develop.
If they want a mirror, nothing prevents them to have a mirror. They have one already indeed:
http://fgfs.goneabitbursar.com/official/
If they do their work at mirroring themselves, why would they want me to do that job again?
You copy the content, archive and close the repo to not receive changes.
I am not interested in mirroring their content. If someone wants their content, they can go straigth to the source to copy it. Right?
FGMEMBERS is a development area. We copy the content and its GPL license, and then use it for developing. Not a mirror, itself.
Not intended to be. On the contrary is intended to create an space where we can develop.
If they want a mirror, nothing prevents them to have a mirror. They have one already indeed:
http://fgfs.goneabitbursar.com/official/
If they do their work at mirroring themselves, why would they want me to do that job again?
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
Yes I understand the going straight to the source but nether the less you're all ready sucking in fgaddon content so it's only a matter of data storage and calling it fgdata-design freeze.
It doesn't mean anything you're doing right now changes
The point being to take the wind from their sales.
Then we can see what else they moan about.... eventually people will see the spoilt brats that they are...whilst looking at Fgmember and seeing people willing to compromise and give concessions
It doesn't mean anything you're doing right now changes
The point being to take the wind from their sales.
Then we can see what else they moan about.... eventually people will see the spoilt brats that they are...whilst looking at Fgmember and seeing people willing to compromise and give concessions
Last edited by bomber on Wed May 18, 2016 4:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchell
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
well..
I take the work via merges, not just copies.
So keeping an unedited version requires a more complex "branching" work (unless you actually close dev)
I don't need to guarantee a "this is FGADDON unmodded" section in FGMEMBERS. You know where to get that if you need it.
(point to the source_FGADDon_ here).
What Bugman actually wants is that once I copy the FGADDon content, I can guarantee we dont modify it. Just mirror it.
It ain't going to happen.
If they want a mirror, they do it: The've done it. and they can do it again.
I take the work via merges, not just copies.
So keeping an unedited version requires a more complex "branching" work (unless you actually close dev)
I don't need to guarantee a "this is FGADDON unmodded" section in FGMEMBERS. You know where to get that if you need it.
(point to the source_FGADDon_ here).
What Bugman actually wants is that once I copy the FGADDon content, I can guarantee we dont modify it. Just mirror it.
It ain't going to happen.
If they want a mirror, they do it: The've done it. and they can do it again.
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
Again I say it's about taking their wind.... it's the clever play.
Look I'm not arguing with ya about it as you know more, but if creating a closed no editable fgaddon mirror is 'nose skin off your nose'
What do you have to lose....
Look I'm not arguing with ya about it as you know more, but if creating a closed no editable fgaddon mirror is 'nose skin off your nose'
What do you have to lose....
Last edited by bomber on Wed May 18, 2016 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If anyone ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me - it's all balls" - R J Mitchell
Re: Responding to Wllbragg
bomber wrote:Then we can see what else they moan about.... eventually people will see the spoilt brats that they are...whilst looking at Fgmember and seeing people willing to compromise and give concessions
I can make a repo that's call "FGADDon Mirror" and have it have this link:
http://www.flightgear.org/download/download-aircraft/
as sole content.
That will be enough of a mirror in FGMEMBERS for them ?
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/IAHM-COL/gpg-pubkey/master/pubkey.asc
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
R.M.S.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it?
Return to “Club of the Banned”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests