On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> ... (Curt wrote) and keep that merged with the "next" branch.
(Fred wrote) I don't understand what you mean. Do you want me to commit the
> work to a new "Rembrandt" branch and then merge it to the "next" branch ?
Hi Fred,
As I mentioned in my past message, I'm not trying to make things more
complicated. If the changes to SimGear are "additive" and don't break the
current FlightGear, then that sounds pretty safe.
In terms of "merging with next" ... what I meant is this (and let me answer
by example.)
I have a local branch I've created here for some experimentation. When
ever I do a git pull from the gitorious repository, I do that in the
"next/master" branches. Then I switch to my local branch and type "git
merge next (or master)" to make my local branch up to date with the main
development "head".
There may be a better way to do that, but it's what was suggested to me,
and seems to work and I've stuck with it.
What I meant with my original comments was to suggest thinking about doing
something similar on gitorious -- create a branch for rembrandt, and then
keep it synced with the main-line changes. But it sounds like we don't
really need that for simgear -- but maybe for FlightGear if the changes
are a bit more intrusive over there?
Personally, I'd be more likely to checkout out a branch and test something
there, than to run around looking for patches and patch my own tree -- the
more automatic process seems like it would save some time. But as I also
mentioned in my previous message, I'm not a git-guru, and I don't claim any
special knowledge of git-best-practices, so there are probably more clever
ways to do whatever I'm suggesting that the git-guru's here could suggest,
or perhaps as you have suggested, what I'm suggesting does not need to be
suggested at all.
I am only speaking of enhancement to the effect system and the new
> light animations that will be useless until the right code is
> committed in flightgear. The only noticeable thing will be the
> point sprite size increase for runway lighting that I find way
> more realistic.
That sounds pretty safe -- thanks!
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson:
http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/
http://www.flightgear.org - http://gallinazo.flightgear.org
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
