Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Hi Curt Maybe these are two types of conferences now. One could be the WIFGH, the Weekly International FlightGear Hangout ;-) Or monthly ? Another option I see now is probably a smaller european conference when I read about this idea at the forums. Maybe spring or summer 2013 is a possible schedule. The problems you mentioned about travelling etc. is serious, but when we are looking for some sponsorship for conference location and accomodation maybe it's doable? We could try to collect money to pay flights for developers who have a good setting for the project, but no money left for travelling now. I will help to collect money and to organize such a meeting. I guess everyone has its prefs about location (see the forum post). I would recommend Switzerland of course, because James and Vivan can park their JU-52 here: http://www.airforcecenter.ch/index.php?id=25 , and because one could invite this guy http://www.rtw2012.com and he can not charge that much expenses . Or because the devs could visit this lab here http://www.sfly.org . Or because the Google Zurich Headquarters could sponsor an international video hangout in the nice old brewery they took. (They also took all the beer!). But ... maybe you know it already, Switzerland is not in Europe unfortunately. Sad, we need to look for another location. (Ok when we go along family size and children, then I will win a location contest probably). -Yves Am 02.12.2012 um 14:35 schrieb Curtis Olson curtol...@flightgear.org: The FS Weekend event has been the closest thing to a developer conference that we've had over the past few years.Our developers are dispersed across the world so any event would involve significant travel for most people. For people with day jobs, young families, or tight budgets, international travel can be a significant challenge. Everyone is in a slightly different situation though, so attending an event might be doable for enough people to make it worth while? With our size, it probably makes sense to continue to piggy back on other larger events. Another thing that might be fun to try is a group skype call or google hangout. I think you have to pay money for the high end version of skype to organize a group skype call, but google hangouts are free. If there's any interest in something like this it would be fun to try it out. I could imagine a weekly hangout to discuss issues of the week, future developments, etc. When FlightGear was first launched in the late 90's, group email was the way these things were done, but now we have more options. For a google hangout we have to deal with timezones around the world, and we'll never have a perfectly convenient time for everyone. If you've never used google hangouts before, you have to download a plugin for your browser (which is available for windows, mac, linux) and then you need a google+ account. I propose google hangouts because it's free to the end user (even though not open-source), supports all the major platforms out there (and can even run on smartphones or tablets), and as far as I know, there isn't an upper limit to the number of participants in a hangout. But if anyone is interested in something like this, let's propose a time to do a test. I think for many people they'll need to spend some time messing around getting the plugin installed, getting their mike and video to work (if they wish to show their face) :-) I got it running pretty quickly on linux, but the true test was that I got it running on a mac and a windows box (which means it can't be all that hard to get running there if I could do it.) :-) Curt. On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Olivier acom...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Yves, all, De : HB-GRAL flightg...@sablonier.ch Envoyé le : Dimanche 2 décembre 2012 12h12 My dream: FlightGear should held a developer meeting once next year. This would be my all time favourite. Have there been such meetings once? At least there were thoughts about doing a FG Eurodev conference ( http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18t=8337 ) after the FSWeekend. FG is a very exciting project, where everyone can find a place where he can contribute depending on his skills, interests, ... Maybe something we are lacking is a kind of roadmap, so we can have a clearer view on the future. Olivier (silent, but working!) -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://gallinazo.flightgear.org
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
The Blender coders organize a weekly IRC meeting ( #blendercoders on freenet), on Sundays at 16:00 CET, in order to discuss outstanding issues, project direction, and to generally work things out. Naturally, Blender is a different kind of project. It is backed by a foundation, which employs (on a salary) people for the sole purpose of developing Blender and managing external contributions, so even though the project is open source it has to find and manage funding and it has a well established organizative structure. I don't expect, nor want, for FlightGear to follow suit (though I imagine that if it gains a footing in commercial applications it will do so almost automatically). But since the blendercoders meetings are open to the general public as long as they don't make themselves a nuisance (you must be authenticated to have voice, but can attend unauthenticated to just follow the discussion), I'd suggest to anyone interested in self-organizing to attend to a couple of them to see how they handle things? Regards, Alessandro From: flightg...@sablonier.ch Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 11:25:59 +0100 To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows Hi Curt Maybe these are two types of conferences now. One could be the WIFGH, the Weekly International FlightGear Hangout ;-) Or monthly ? Another option I see now is probably a smaller european conference when I read about this idea at the forums. Maybe spring or summer 2013 is a possible schedule. The problems you mentioned about travelling etc. is serious, but when we are looking for some sponsorship for conference location and accomodation maybe it's doable? We could try to collect money to pay flights for developers who have a good setting for the project, but no money left for travelling now. I will help to collect money and to organize such a meeting. I guess everyone has its prefs about location (see the forum post). I would recommend Switzerland of course, because James and Vivan can park their JU-52 here: http://www.airforcecenter.ch/index.php?id=25 , and because one could invite this guy http://www.rtw2012.com and he can not charge that much expenses . Or because the devs could visit this lab here http://www.sfly.org . Or because the Google Zurich Headquarters could sponsor an international video hangout in the nice old brewery they took. (They also took all the beer!). But ... maybe you know it already, Switzerland is not in Europe unfortunately. Sad, we need to look for another location. (Ok when we go along family size and children, then I will win a location contest probably). -Yves Am 02.12.2012 um 14:35 schrieb Curtis Olson curtol...@flightgear.org: The FS Weekend event has been the closest thing to a developer conference that we've had over the past few years.Our developers are dispersed across the world so any event would involve significant travel for most people. For people with day jobs, young families, or tight budgets, international travel can be a significant challenge. Everyone is in a slightly different situation though, so attending an event might be doable for enough people to make it worth while? With our size, it probably makes sense to continue to piggy back on other larger events. Another thing that might be fun to try is a group skype call or google hangout. I think you have to pay money for the high end version of skype to organize a group skype call, but google hangouts are free. If there's any interest in something like this it would be fun to try it out. I could imagine a weekly hangout to discuss issues of the week, future developments, etc. When FlightGear was first launched in the late 90's, group email was the way these things were done, but now we have more options. For a google hangout we have to deal with timezones around the world, and we'll never have a perfectly convenient time for everyone. If you've never used google hangouts before, you have to download a plugin for your browser (which is available for windows, mac, linux) and then you need a google+ account. I propose google hangouts because it's free to the end user (even though not open-source), supports all the major platforms out there (and can even run on smartphones or tablets), and as far as I know, there isn't an upper limit to the number of participants in a hangout. But if anyone is interested in something like this, let's propose a time to do a test. I think for many people they'll need to spend some time messing around getting the plugin installed, getting their mike and video to work (if they wish to show their face) :-) I got it running pretty quickly on linux, but the true test was that I got it running on a mac and a windows box (which means it can't be all that hard to get running there if I could do it.) :-) Curt. On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Olivier acom...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Yves, all
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Please let me be very clear about a few things. This is not about lack of praise or thanks - I'm doing weather and light mainly because I like doing it, because I like to see if I can capture the essence of a scene I see in real life in shader code. I am passionate and excited about that, and I try to share this excitement for instance in the forum. But ultimately, my gratification is that I myself can fly into the perfect sunrise. This is about being a team or not being a team, and my vision of being in a team is some amount of mutual support, not that teammates lob rocks into my path. So, for me being in the FG team implies that I consider project needs in addition to my own preferences. For instance, I spend some time explaining and summarizing devel list discussions to forum users. For instance, I try hard to accomodate a release schedule even if it clashes violently with my private schedule. I hand my stuff in via GIT merge requests, although I absolutely hate dealing with GIT and although it costs me a lot of extra time - because TorstenD convinced me that it's better for the rest of the team to see what is affected than if I package as tarball. I try to discuss what I'm doing early on so that we have the possibility to create some coherence in the project, if someone asks for feedback, I usually try to find the time to give it. So for me the team is not just a bunch of people with commit rights who work next to each other. But in return, I do expect a few modest things - common fair play in dealing with each other, and some help from the experts if needed. So, if I'm working on something, someone else is working on a similar thing, says 'Send it over, we'll merge yours in.' and I do so, and nothing comes of it after 6 months waiting, that's not a problem - we're all volunteers and schedules may not work as planned. A simple 'sorry, didn't work out' would be nice. My problem starts when the story is later told as 'I can't work with you, because you insist in doing things your way.' Because that's a lie, and has nothing to do with fair play in the team. I have no problem with criticism as such (I tend not to take it so well initially, but after sleeping over it, I usually can accept that I was wrong). I think it's a necessary, though uncomfortable, part of development. I do speak up now and then and say my piece about things I consider badly done. I usually do this after I've convinced myself that I understand the problem, i.e. after working for a week, trying alternative solutions and having found something better. I think it's common decency that if we say bad things about other's work, we should at least be sure it's justified. What is not fair play is armchair criticism which is just taking cheap potshots. Snide remarks at Nasal coding, because we know it's bad, right, regardless if any measurable evidence says otherwise. Offhand remarks about shader performance. And so on. We get to hear a really vast array of that, despite the fact that this is a devel list where people should know better. It's so cheap - it costs 10 seconds to write down a claim, it may cost a week to disprove it. And if I don't understand a problem but have the feeling something is going wrong, then I might as well ask a question rather then complaining ahead. There have been things of late for which, try as I might, I can't find a charitable explanation. For instance, I introduced a bug into the urban shader when in the aftermath of throwing the binormal out or varyings and replacing it with cross products. I didn't notice it, because it's not in my devel branch. Emilian notices it, comments on it, traces it to my work comments that he's going to send Fred a note, but doesn't tell me a thing, yet when I finally notice it, I get to hear 'You did that' immediately. I ask myself - how on earth is it in the interest of the project if the one person most likely to be able to quickly fix the bug is identified but not notified? I couldn't come up with a reasonable explanation, but I can come up with a few less charming ones. It's not my idea of teamplay. I get to hear comments like 'You can't rely on z being up in shader space' here - but when I ask how I should do it alternatively, then all I get is silence. What idea of propagating information is this? I've read my statements with regard to Windows/Linux a few times. Given that X-Plane apparently is distributed in a binary edition, the question why we don't do it doesn't seem grossly unreasonable to me. Given that I even said after being introduced to the Build Server that I take back my remark if that is the concept, there's absolutely no reason in my text I can see for ThorstenB to paint me here as a petulant user who feels entitled to prime service from a volunteer, thinks everyone involved does a bad job and is pissed because he can't get what he wants. So whatever the reason may be, that again crossed a
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Am 01.12.12 14:15, schrieb Pat: Does this ring any bells? http://unprotocols.org/blog:14 Hi Pat This link .. exactly. That’s probably all what I was thinking about when I sent my thanks to the list for Thorsten (for ALL t(h)orstens at the end, anyway for all contributors, leaders, non-leaders, core developers, small developers, for the community at all). Since many weeks when I was looking to some posts here at ML such bells were ringing loud enough. I’m just a small small contributor and am in a comfortable situation with well paid work outside open source projects. I thought some of the developers here knows very well about this behaviour and should react when the bells are starting to ring for others. Someone might say this is in self-responsability, but in my experience this is only half of the truth. At the end I’m very happy to see people around here with some social skills. Me I’m just an Emo-Poster sometimes, hitting the send button too fast when I’m reading about frustration of others, I apologize for that. My dream: FlightGear should held a developer meeting once next year. This would be my all time favourite. Have there been such meetings once? -Yves -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Hi Yves, all, De : HB-GRAL flightg...@sablonier.ch Envoyé le : Dimanche 2 décembre 2012 12h12 My dream: FlightGear should held a developer meeting once next year. This would be my all time favourite. Have there been such meetings once? At least there were thoughts about doing a FG Eurodev conference ( http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18t=8337 ) after the FSWeekend. FG is a very exciting project, where everyone can find a place where he can contribute depending on his skills, interests, ... Maybe something we are lacking is a kind of roadmap, so we can have a clearer view on the future. Olivier (silent, but working!) -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
The FS Weekend event has been the closest thing to a developer conference that we've had over the past few years.Our developers are dispersed across the world so any event would involve significant travel for most people. For people with day jobs, young families, or tight budgets, international travel can be a significant challenge. Everyone is in a slightly different situation though, so attending an event might be doable for enough people to make it worth while? With our size, it probably makes sense to continue to piggy back on other larger events. Another thing that might be fun to try is a group skype call or google hangout. I think you have to pay money for the high end version of skype to organize a group skype call, but google hangouts are free. If there's any interest in something like this it would be fun to try it out. I could imagine a weekly hangout to discuss issues of the week, future developments, etc. When FlightGear was first launched in the late 90's, group email was the way these things were done, but now we have more options. For a google hangout we have to deal with timezones around the world, and we'll never have a perfectly convenient time for everyone. If you've never used google hangouts before, you have to download a plugin for your browser (which is available for windows, mac, linux) and then you need a google+ account. I propose google hangouts because it's free to the end user (even though not open-source), supports all the major platforms out there (and can even run on smartphones or tablets), and as far as I know, there isn't an upper limit to the number of participants in a hangout. But if anyone is interested in something like this, let's propose a time to do a test. I think for many people they'll need to spend some time messing around getting the plugin installed, getting their mike and video to work (if they wish to show their face) :-) I got it running pretty quickly on linux, but the true test was that I got it running on a mac and a windows box (which means it can't be all that hard to get running there if I could do it.) :-) Curt. On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 7:04 AM, Olivier acom...@yahoo.com wrote: Hi Yves, all, -- *De :* HB-GRAL flightg...@sablonier.ch *Envoyé le :* Dimanche 2 décembre 2012 12h12 ** My dream: FlightGear should held a developer meeting once next year. This would be my all time favourite. Have there been such meetings once? At least there were thoughts about doing a FG Eurodev conference ( http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=18t=8337 ) after the FSWeekend. FG is a very exciting project, where everyone can find a place where he can contribute depending on his skills, interests, ... Maybe something we are lacking is a kind of roadmap, so we can have a clearer view on the future. Olivier (silent, but working!) -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://gallinazo.flightgear.org -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On 12/02/2012 02:35 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: and as far as I know, there isn't an upper limit to the number of participants in a hangout. The limit is 10 according to this. https://support.google.com/plus/bin/answer.py?hl=enanswer=1216374 Hans. 0x4FD802C3.asc Description: application/pgp-keys -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Sun, 02 Dec 2012 14:53:03 +0100 Hans Janssen handigehan...@gmail.com wrote: On 12/02/2012 02:35 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: and as far as I know, there isn't an upper limit to the number of participants in a hangout. The limit is 10 according to this. https://support.google.com/plus/bin/answer.py?hl=enanswer=1216374 Hans. ok so 10 at a time. with a waiting room on irc... and with a fast connection for video. Now I just need a camera my logitech headset working and we're good to go. -Pat -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: DESIGN Expert tips on starting your parallel project right. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Sun, 2 Dec 2012 08:47:06 -0600, Curtis wrote in message CAHtsj_fx33eVFv_s_F0hzHyd=kcjp6fqlq+k2i-094dbr46...@mail.gmail.com: On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Hans Janssen handigehan...@gmail.comwrote: On 12/02/2012 02:35 PM, Curtis Olson wrote: and as far as I know, there isn't an upper limit to the number of participants in a hangout. The limit is 10 according to this. https://support.google.com/plus/bin/answer.py?hl=enanswer=1216374 Hmmm, you learn something new every day ... :-) Poking around on the skype site it looks like we can do audio-only (+ text message chat) calls with up to 100 participants for free. Maybe that's would be the thing to try first if there was interest in a weekly (?) skype call. ..I seem to remember talk of a FG voip client on multiplayer servers years back here? Dropping FG graphics for webcam video, would land us a video conference setup. ..combining these, would allow us a _real_ FG airshow online, a lot of the going to airshows, is chatting with people at these airshows, airshows _are_ after all, social events. ..meanwhile, practical ideas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BigBlueButton http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeSWITCH https://www.webhuddle.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Openmeetings http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_web_conferencing_software http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_conferencing ..a quicker but proprietary way is use paltalk express: http://express.paltalk.com/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paltalk#Paltalk_Express -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: BUILD Helping you discover the best ways to construct your parallel projects. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On 12/01/2012 02:04 AM, HB-GRAL wrote: Am 29.11.12 08:59, schrieb Renk Thorsten: So, good to know that you apparently see me as someone who has nothing better to do than complain because the service isn't good. You know what - I'm out of here for a really good long break, doing something nice. The FG experience for me of late feels like an endless string of frustrating events. Other people do work as well, you know? I've burnt every scrap of my spare time to get my last merge request together before the feature freeze (since I knew I'd probably lose a lot of time getting a new computer ready for everything) to the point that I started to dream of code every night, and right now I'm asking myself why the hell I've been doing that. Well, it's there on the server, do whatever you want with it, and if my main contribution is complaining, then everyone is better off if I remove myself for a while. Cheers, * Thorsten We all keep quiet of course, no one sends thanks to Thorsten and saying that his work IS interesting and that everyone of us can reach that. I do, sorry for that, YOU project leaders, poor ones. Problem is, there are no project leaders. And that worked remarkably well for quite a while. I think everyone involved in FlighGear is busy working on other things right now. I know I am, and for a good reason; I learned the hard way FlighGear isn't going to pay my bill so I spent all of my time to projects that do. So let me be very clear: lack of response has nothing to do with disrespect or anything like that, until FlightGear provides means to pay any bills this situation isn't going to chance. I know this may feel frustrating sometimes but it's just the fact of life. Erik -- http://www.adalin.com - Hardware accelerated AeonWave and OpenAL for Windows and Linux -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Problem is, there are no project leaders. And that worked remarkably well for quite a while. I think everyone involved in FlighGear is busy working on other things right now. I know I am, and for a good reason; I learned the hard way FlighGear isn't going to pay my bill so I spent all of my time to projects that do. So let me be very clear: lack of response has nothing to do with disrespect or anything like that, until FlightGear provides means to pay any bills this situation isn't going to chance. I know this may feel frustrating sometimes but it's just the fact of life. Erik I know I'm a nobody compared to you on this list, but I've given hundreds of hours of time to Flightgear (Durk can testify to that) so I feel I should have a voice. I don't think Fligthgear will EVER provide any means to pay any bills until you (the leaders, whoever feels responsible for the project) stop trying to compete with MSFS and X-Plane in the mild entertainment department and start marketing to the big league. I know there are some guys who are trying to do something about that, and some are not even core developers. It's also what I'm trying to do with the realistic radio code, and I will continue to do so until I run out of speed and altitude and I crash and burn. My 2 cents, whatever that's worth these days. Also, thanks ThorstenB for a continuous stream of commits, bugfixes and enhancements, thanks ThorstenR for a great weather system. Keep your speed up and increase your AGL for a while. Cheers, Adrian -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
My thanks to everybody who's ever comitted anything without getting paid money for it. Thank you. For responding to my posts on the mailing lists. And for talking with me on irc. Thanks for Flightgear. It's a great hobby. I appreciate it and all of you. -Pat -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Does this ring any bells? http://unprotocols.org/blog:14 -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:12 AM, Pat pat.callah...@gmail.com wrote: My thanks to everybody who's ever comitted anything without getting paid money for it. Thank you. For responding to my posts on the mailing lists. And for talking with me on irc. Thanks for Flightgear. It's a great hobby. I appreciate it and all of you. Responding to earlier comments: There are most definitely leaders in any open source project -- they are those that bust their tails to do all the hard work. It is therefore not an exclusive club. But it is a club you need to earn your way into. It is not a club of ideas (although ideas are certainly valuable.) It's not a club of suggestions or wishes. Leadership in an opensource project is a club of action and doing. It is not the same sort of top down leadership you would find in business or politics. Volunteers do not respond well to being told what do to and having deadlines imposed on them. Open Source leadership is the sort of leadership that you might find in a group of climbers trying to scale a high peak. Words often do not need to be spoken. The leaders are the ones who step forward and do the hard work and make the way easier for everyone following. Open-source is also not a perfect world -- as soon as humans get involved in just about any endeavor we have communication challenges, differences of opinions, misunderstandings, and all that rolled on top of our own personal shortcomings (and we all have a few.) So it's important to remember that we are all volunteers doing this for the fun of it, for the challenge of it, for the experience. We are a group, we all have different skills and bring a different perspective, and contribute in different ways. Roles can evolve over time as the project evolves, as people's life situations evolve. Centralizing versus decentralizing an organization's structures is a debate that goes on in every organization -- there is a dilbert cartoon about that. In an imperfect world we are always seeking to improve the situation, but every change brings pluses and minus so what sounds good might not always be as big of a win once you play out all the consequences and side effects and bring equilibrium back to the system. Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://gallinazo.flightgear.org -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Am 29.11.12 08:59, schrieb Renk Thorsten: So, good to know that you apparently see me as someone who has nothing better to do than complain because the service isn't good. You know what - I'm out of here for a really good long break, doing something nice. The FG experience for me of late feels like an endless string of frustrating events. Other people do work as well, you know? I've burnt every scrap of my spare time to get my last merge request together before the feature freeze (since I knew I'd probably lose a lot of time getting a new computer ready for everything) to the point that I started to dream of code every night, and right now I'm asking myself why the hell I've been doing that. Well, it's there on the server, do whatever you want with it, and if my main contribution is complaining, then everyone is better off if I remove myself for a while. Cheers, * Thorsten We all keep quiet of course, no one sends thanks to Thorsten and saying that his work IS interesting and that everyone of us can reach that. I do, sorry for that, YOU project leaders, poor ones. -Yves -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
There are reasons for most people to use Ubuntu alike: http://www.playdeb.net/software/flightgear Anyway a jenkins Linux build would be interesting, altough I use the downloadcompile script. --- On Thu, 11/29/12, Renk Thorsten thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi wrote: From: Renk Thorsten thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Thursday, November 29, 2012, 8:59 AM Me asking a genuine question: Why do I need to make a song and dance to get the last stable under Linux when it works no fuss under Windows? Are we genuinely unable to provide a working generic 32 and a 64bit set of binaryies for Linux? I know that lib paths and versions are different across distribtions, but can't one simply compile the thing static? (...) I am genuinely at a loss here. A normal Linux user has practically no change to get last stable on his box running if it isn't in his distro - a normal Windows user gets everything nice and streamlined. Me accepting an explanation given: This sounds very neat, and if this works in practice, then I take my comment back - being able to get an rpm for any major Linux distribution would be equivalent to the Windows installer in terms of usability. Me being painted as if I'd just complain because I can't get first-grade service: Yes, it would still be nice to have a universal build. And I guess, ThorstenR (and probably others) think we're therefore doing a lousy job and should just spend more time on FG - like work full time to provide you the perfect service that you clearly all deserve (and for free, of course) :) (...) Finally, something funny. ThorstenR complained about FG2.8 not being available for Fedora 17 (it only provides 2.6). Well, yes, too bad. FYI: I genuinely do not know how difficult it is to compile a static binary and put it on our website for download. I consider asking why this is done not equal to implying that X does a lousy job, nor equal to a complaint. My basic point was about impressions. I would like to be able to point more people I know to Linux 'See, it's easy, it's not an OS only for people who compile their own Kernels any more.' So, it struck me quite a bit how damn easy it was to get everything working under Windows, and that it wasn't looking too well for Linux in comparison. The experience made me wonder what the Windows advantage here really is and if we couldn't remove it. Sorry for asking that question aloud. So, good to know that you apparently see me as someone who has nothing better to do than complain because the service isn't good. You know what - I'm out of here for a really good long break, doing something nice. The FG experience for me of late feels like an endless string of frustrating events. Other people do work as well, you know? I've burnt every scrap of my spare time to get my last merge request together before the feature freeze (since I knew I'd probably lose a lot of time getting a new computer ready for everything) to the point that I started to dream of code every night, and right now I'm asking myself why the hell I've been doing that. Well, it's there on the server, do whatever you want with it, and if my main contribution is complaining, then everyone is better off if I remove myself for a while. Cheers, * Thorsten -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
For me the question is not so much how to get there, but where do we want to go and who's going to make the effort. From reading this thread and others, a lot of work done on managing the release process. Is there still some work to do in the area of builds for various audiences? Which distros have flightgear and what version do they have in their repositories? Where did the package for Ubuntu come from? Who built the package? Who maintains it? Is there a way to manage packaging across distros? -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 21:51:57 -0500, Pat wrote in message 20121127215157.0f27252b@spinnaker: For me the question is not so much how to get there, but where do we want to go and who's going to make the effort. ..that will be decided meritocratically by whoever codes something that's more than good enough for the rest of us. From reading this thread and others, a lot of work done on managing the release process. Is there still some work to do in the area of builds for various audiences? ..some, yes, IMO mostly pieceing together e.g. the buildscripts I suggested, with distro specific packaging scripts. The latter are usually (IME rpm in my Red Hat days) capable of producing the right binaries from your git etc FG source tree, and can be installed alongside the official distro's FG, with non-conflicting binary names a la /usr/bin/arnt's-fgfs-wo-jpg-factory if this brl-cad.org binary nameing idea survived FG's move to cmake. ..so for each distro release, we may want a stable release, a bleading edge, and a last night's bug hunter build, which is why we should automate this scheme, if we even think of trying it. Which distros have flightgear and what version do they have in their repositories? ..most general use desktop distros, and they usually go with the lates stable release, in the Debian Stable case, we're even more paranoid, flightgear-1.9.1-1.1+b1, you need to upgrade to the development release (always Debian Sid) where we now have flightgear-2.6.0-1. ..special use distros usually don't, unless special use happens to be gaming, flight simulation, flightgear or flightgear development. ;o) Where did the package for Ubuntu come from? ..not sure, Debian Sid would be my guess. Who built the package? Who maintains it? ..in Debian and Ubuntu, Ove Kaaven: http://packages.ubuntu.com/quantal/games/flightgear Is there a way to manage packaging across distros? ..not _a_, but _many_ ways. Debian probably has the best (and biggest) pile of tools to do this, I have this vision of somebody running this virtual build-n-test cluster off his git tree from a laptop, or some such. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Wednesday 28 November 2012 18:05:53 Arnt Karlsen wrote: Is there a way to manage packaging across distros? ..not _a_, but _many_ ways. Debian probably has the best (and biggest) pile of tools to do this, I have this vision of somebody running this virtual build-n-test cluster off his git tree from a laptop, or some such. Visions are nice, links are better: https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?project=gamespackage=FlightGear https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?project=games%3AFlightGear%3AUnstablepackage=flightgear A good first step would be to contact the maintainer of the FlightGear package in the games repository and ask why build is disabled for all non-openSUSE distributions. Stefan -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: INSIGHTS What's next for parallel hardware, programming and related areas? Interviews and blogs by thought leaders keep you ahead of the curve. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Am 28.11.2012 20:12, schrieb Stefan Seifert: A good first step would be to contact the maintainer of the FlightGear package in the games repository and ask why build is disabled for all non-openSUSE distributions. Well, that would be me ;-), and since you have already asked: The cross-platform build is disabled for FG because building for other distros isn't just a matter of flipping a switch. First, you need to ensure that all the dependent libraries are available. And when you check the OBS repositories, you'll notice very few packages provide support for other distros. So, you'll need to start bottom-up, take care of lots of packages, OSG, dependent graphics and sound libraries - and lots stuff that they depend upon. The OBS cross-platform support was introduced years ago, but few package maintainers have adopted it. Next, you'll need to make sure that the build spec file works for other distros. Each distro comes with their subtle differences. Even in between versions: it's sometimes funny enough to build a spec file which works with several versions of the same distro (sometimes you need to install the libsvn package, sometimes it's libsvn-1). After all, you will still need to deal with every single distro. The advantage with Linux is: it is free and everyone can adapt it. The disadvantage is: Linux distros actually use their freedom. Linux is not like Windows, where you build a binary and it just runs everywhere (well, yes, mostly). It's a flexible platform which every distro somehow adapts to their own needs and likes - sometimes maybe even intentionally to distinguish themselves from others. Also, each distro maintains its own app store (well, they don't call it like that, but it's really what it is - except that it's all free) and many, if not most users will even refuse to install stuff from other sources (considering separate installers too difficult - or fearing it could mess up their system or trigger update problems). So, universal binaries aren't even welcome everywhere. I only adopted the OpenSUSE packages, which helps with finding things causing problems with packaging, like incomplete install rules, missing icons, invalid ASCII encodings in documents/READMEs, or with different compiler versions (the OBS build currently uses 4 different GCC versions). All the stuff, which isn't noticed when building stuff locally - but which prevents building a proper package or having it accepted into a distro. I can fix these things directly in FG, which should make things easier for other packagers. What I have also tried for the FG 2.8 release, was getting in contact with other package maintainers. Reminding them of the new release, giving them some hints on what needs to be changed. Many have updated their packages pretty quickly - which may already be an improvement (see below). When possible, I'm also taking patches upstream, so they don't need to mess with adapting local patches for every release (yes, the infamous shared library thing is an example). This helps with speeding up the updates. Concerning FG 2.8 (released August 17th), what I am aware of: * OpenSUSE (released August 17th) https://build.opensuse.org/package/show?project=gamespackage=FlightGear * Playdeb for Ubuntu (released August 18th) http://www.playdeb.net/software/flightgear * FreeBSD (released September 7th) http://www.freshports.org/games/flightgear * Fedora (released September 11th) http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=1200 * Arch Linux (released October 8th) https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/x86_64/flightgear/ * Gentoo (October 15th) http://packages.gentoo.org/package/games-simulation/flightgear * Debian (2.6.0 (not 2.8.0!) accepted into stable on October 30th) http://packages.debian.org/de/sid/flightgear Yes, it would still be nice to have a universal build. And I guess, ThorstenR (and probably others) think we're therefore doing a lousy job and should just spend more time on FG - like work full time to provide you the perfect service that you clearly all deserve (and for free, of course) :). But at times you notice live is really short. You really need to think about what you want to do, and on which things you really want to spend your precious spare time on. And do I personally want to be responsible for building a package that runs on *any* Linux distro in the universe - and to somehow take care of all their ugly tweaks? To be frank: no. The advantage of the current approach is: it distributes the work. It involves people which actually know and care about their individual distros - and, at least I do not need to do it all on my own. Yes, it may mean there's an extra latency before a new version becomes available for some distros. But is it really _so_ bad, like Debian users apparently seeing an 8 month delay? Or that Linux users may need to update their OS every 2 years (well, you have to update anyway, since
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Wed, 28 Nov 2012 23:03:55 +0100, ThorstenB wrote in message 50b68a4b.7050...@gmail.com: * Debian (2.6.0 (not 2.8.0!) accepted into stable on October 30th) http://packages.debian.org/de/sid/flightgear ..while I agree Debian Sid is stable enough for most people here, Debian policy defines Sid as unstable. ..and I now remember another neat tool for FG packaging etc management: whohas, aptitude etc install it, then try 'whohas flightgear '. ;o) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Thorsten, Thanks. Your response was cleared up a lot. I had been wondering how the personal relationships between the flightgear project and the distributions actually worked. I was also wondering if the process of getting flightgear into distributions was broken and needed fixing or not. If I understand your comments, the process is not broken and is working as well as can be expected. Also, If I read you right, you and perhaps others are already involved with some distributions and don't particularly want to take over responsibility for packaging flightgear, but will work with distro specific flightgear package maintainers to keep the packaging process flying level by making appropriate changes in flightgear. What can we do to make this kind of activity more visible so folks like me have an opportunity to help in small ways. -Pat Yes, it would still be nice to have a universal build. And I guess, ThorstenR (and probably others) think we're therefore doing a lousy job and should just spend more time on FG - like work full time to provide you the perfect service that you clearly all deserve (and for free, of course) :). We would never say that. I have about 15 minutes a day of free time and know exactly what you mean. (Its time for dinner and Jeopardy as I'm writing this) But at times you notice live is really short. You really need to think about what you want to do, and on which things you really want to spend your precious spare time on. And do I personally want to be responsible for building a package that runs on *any* Linux distro in the universe - and to somehow take care of all their ugly tweaks? To be frank: no. Amen! The advantage of the current approach is: it distributes the work. It involves people which actually know and care about their individual distros - and, at least I do not need to do it all on my own. Yes, it may mean there's an extra latency before a new version becomes available for some distros. But is it really _so_ bad, like Debian users apparently seeing an 8 month delay? Or that Linux users may need to update their OS every 2 years (well, you have to update anyway, since maintenance and security updates stop). Nothing at all wrong. Some of us just need to understand, and you've explained it well. Also, to me it feels like the really hard-core Linux FlightGear people, which _really_ care about running the very latest version (people like you!), even consider FG 2.8 outdated - and directly run Git instead. Updating weekly... ;-) If, however, anyone feels he could do it - provide a universal installation - or run a build which produces packages for every distro - you'll surely get my support. I'm also happy to accept merge requests on the OBS, if anyone can really get the cross-platform build to work. What's an OBS. (Don't answer that I'll look it up ...) snip Gotta run. Biscuits are ready to come out of the oven. -Pat -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Me asking a genuine question: Why do I need to make a song and dance to get the last stable under Linux when it works no fuss under Windows? Are we genuinely unable to provide a working generic 32 and a 64bit set of binaryies for Linux? I know that lib paths and versions are different across distribtions, but can't one simply compile the thing static? (...) I am genuinely at a loss here. A normal Linux user has practically no change to get last stable on his box running if it isn't in his distro - a normal Windows user gets everything nice and streamlined. Me accepting an explanation given: This sounds very neat, and if this works in practice, then I take my comment back - being able to get an rpm for any major Linux distribution would be equivalent to the Windows installer in terms of usability. Me being painted as if I'd just complain because I can't get first-grade service: Yes, it would still be nice to have a universal build. And I guess, ThorstenR (and probably others) think we're therefore doing a lousy job and should just spend more time on FG - like work full time to provide you the perfect service that you clearly all deserve (and for free, of course) :) (...) Finally, something funny. ThorstenR complained about FG2.8 not being available for Fedora 17 (it only provides 2.6). Well, yes, too bad. FYI: I genuinely do not know how difficult it is to compile a static binary and put it on our website for download. I consider asking why this is done not equal to implying that X does a lousy job, nor equal to a complaint. My basic point was about impressions. I would like to be able to point more people I know to Linux 'See, it's easy, it's not an OS only for people who compile their own Kernels any more.' So, it struck me quite a bit how damn easy it was to get everything working under Windows, and that it wasn't looking too well for Linux in comparison. The experience made me wonder what the Windows advantage here really is and if we couldn't remove it. Sorry for asking that question aloud. So, good to know that you apparently see me as someone who has nothing better to do than complain because the service isn't good. You know what - I'm out of here for a really good long break, doing something nice. The FG experience for me of late feels like an endless string of frustrating events. Other people do work as well, you know? I've burnt every scrap of my spare time to get my last merge request together before the feature freeze (since I knew I'd probably lose a lot of time getting a new computer ready for everything) to the point that I started to dream of code every night, and right now I'm asking myself why the hell I've been doing that. Well, it's there on the server, do whatever you want with it, and if my main contribution is complaining, then everyone is better off if I remove myself for a while. Cheers, * Thorsten -- Keep yourself connected to Go Parallel: VERIFY Test and improve your parallel project with help from experts and peers. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Tuesday 27 November 2012 07:56:02 Renk Thorsten wrote: Binary releases on Linux are /possible/ but a pain - working with each distro's packaging system is definitely the way to go, in my opinion. That basically seems to require that everyone who wants most recent FG needs to update to most recent Linux. No it doesn't. There's nothing preventing us from providing packages for older distribution versions. On the openSUSE Build Service it's usually just selecting the versions and packages will get built automatically. Stefan -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On 27 Nov 2012, at 08:01, Stefan Seifert n...@detonation.org wrote: That basically seems to require that everyone who wants most recent FG needs to update to most recent Linux. No it doesn't. There's nothing preventing us from providing packages for older distribution versions. On the openSUSE Build Service it's usually just selecting the versions and packages will get built automatically. Right - you can supply packages for Ubuntu 9.04 if you like - (and we probably should, for the current Ubuntu LTS release) - and the same for Fedora. As I said, I think the *only* thing missing is motivated Fedora and Ubuntu users with sufficient knowledge of SRPMs/debs/scripting - keeping in mind we already have official packages for those distros, created by people 'outside' FG, *and* various developers here have worked hard to ensure the code builds cleanly - that was the reason for support a shared-library mode in SimGear. And I will gladly assist/review *any* code change that helps / simplifies / reduces patches to make the above work - I really do want to see it happen - I'm just clueless about Linux packaging! James -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
No it doesn't. There's nothing preventing us from providing packages for older distribution versions. This sounds very neat, and if this works in practice, then I take my comment back - being able to get an rpm for any major Linux distribution would be equivalent to the Windows installer in terms of usability. * Thorsten -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Tue, 27 Nov 2012 09:39:42 +, Renk wrote in message e495a106ff5f31448739e79d34138c191e169...@mbs1.ad.jyu.fi: No it doesn't. There's nothing preventing us from providing packages for older distribution versions. This sounds very neat, and if this works in practice, then I take my comment back - being able to get an rpm for any major Linux distribution would be equivalent to the Windows installer in terms of usability. ..the best way to get there, is build upon scripts like: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Scripted_Compilation_on_Linux_Debian/Ubuntu and http://geoffair.net/fg/ ... ...like http://wiki.flightgear.org/CentOS does, and build deb, rpm etc distro packages, rather than just build binaries out of the sources. ..in the Debian, Ubuntu etc world, .deb packages can be built like: http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/using-checkinstall-build-packages-source or http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/build.en.html from http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/maint-guide/index.en.html ..for rpm, I recommend reading the output of 'man rpmbuild'. .._sometimes_, deb, rpm etc packages can be converted to other distro packaging formats with /usr/bin/alien, details in 'man alien', this approach may fail on e.g. Ubuntu developers disagreeing with Debian .deb packaging policy, or a rpm database not seeing conflicts coming with a .deb binary, checkinstall may help you solve those conflicts. ..some guys are just plain lucky, e.g. http://wiki.flightgear.org/Building_Flightgear_-_Gentoo ..these build scripts can also be packaged as e.g. deb, rpm etc meta-packages that can be used to e.g. set up a build server. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On Monday 26 November 2012 09:45:51 Renk Thorsten wrote: I am genuinely at a loss here. A normal Linux user has practically no change to get last stable on his box running if it isn't in his distro - a normal Windows user gets everything nice and streamlined. Does anyone else understand this? Linux != Fedora. There's obviously only outdated packages for Fedora. But that's a problem that can be fixed. As an openSUSE user, I have the choice of FlightGear 2.8.0 in the games repository, or 2.9.0 in games:FlightGear:Unstable thanks to the openSUSE Build Service. I just have to look for flightgear on http://software.opensuse.org/search, Show unstable packages and hit 1 Click Install. Nice and streamlined indeed. The nice thing is: the openSUSE Build Service is not limited to openSUSE. Packages can be created for Debian, Fedora, Mandriva and Ubuntu as well. And once you got that set up, it's very little work to maintain. I think this could be a great way to make FlightGear better available to Linux users. Stefan signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
On 26 Nov 2012, at 09:59, Stefan Seifert n...@detonation.org wrote: The nice thing is: the openSUSE Build Service is not limited to openSUSE. Packages can be created for Debian, Fedora, Mandriva and Ubuntu as well. And once you got that set up, it's very little work to maintain. I think this could be a great way to make FlightGear better available to Linux users. Right, I've been hoping people would do this for Fedora and Ubuntu for some time - ideally a package that doesn't depend on FGData of course. This would be doubly advantageous, because it would make it easier for people to test the Git code on Linux, but also reduce the amount of time developers spend helper non-developers compile the sim. Binary releases on Linux are /possible/ but a pain - working with each distro's packaging system is definitely the way to go, in my opinion. We have plenty of servers to host such things, and Jenkins to trigger builds (though the SUSE system handles both of those things itself, I believe). I think what's missing is Fedora / Ubuntu users with the right mix of motivation and knowledge to make it happen for those distros... James -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Personally I've moved to Ubuntu 10.04 as I couldn't get my soundcard working anymore on Suse ca. back in 2009. I've never looked back and probably never ever use again Suse... --- On Mon, 11/26/12, Renk Thorsten thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi wrote: From: Renk Thorsten thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Monday, November 26, 2012, 10:45 AM So, I finally broke down over the weekend, getting so frustrated with a the GPU not powering up under Linux that I installed FG on Windows. If I want to get FG last stable under Fedora 17, I have to compile it myself, only 2.6 is on the repo. The process is probably similar to compiling current GIT. Which took me more than 5 hours to get right, which means a normal user can't do it. I frequently use compilers, know the FG structure, can read scripting language, know RPMfinder and other tools... my wife is a normal Linux user who never in her life compiled anything. The problem isn't the obvious things - the problem are the implied things. Like cmake warns about libsvn not being installed and being needed for Terrasync. Now, I happen to know what Terrasync is, I also happen to know what libsvn is for, my wife doesn't. Searching on the 'Add software' tool for libsvn draws a blank, but I know that it stands for subversion, so I find it. I install boost, yet cmake throws an error that it can't find config files - WTF, I just installed it... Wait a minute, there's a different package which contains cmake support for boost, maybe if I install that as well? In the end, cmake runs through, but the compiler then bitches about its inability to find libXmu (or so)? So, I know what to do, I look for the lib in /usr/lib64, see what the name is. open CmakeCache.txt, look by what name cmake wants the lib to be identified, pass that as explicit parameter to cmake - voila, it finally compiles. Then I had the funny directory issues I metioned , but that was just me trying to do user install instead of system wide - self-inflicted, one might say. If anyone believes that a normal Linux user can install last stable FG this way, he's kidding himself. For Ubuntu, there's the download and compile script, I don't know how good that is and what it assumes about packages being installed - but since the package manager is different, sure doesn't work on Fedora. Now, I installed FG on windows. One package, double-click, I don't even need to know if I am on Windows Vista or Windows 7, one click to select the 64bit version, 30 seconds later I am on the runway. Want current GIT instead of 2.8.5 - no problem, just copied the 64bit binaries from Jenkins, copied my FGData, and I'm seeing the state of my latest merge request (copying 6.3 GB was the only delay here). Please don't get this wrong - I'm a Linux person to the bone. I like xterm, using command lines, the ability to see configuration files directly, the ability to use commands which actually do what I tell, and desktops free of 'Your computer is at risk!' and other attention-grabbing messages very much. But... why? Why do I need to make a song and dance to get the last stable under Linux when it works no fuss under Windows? Are we genuinely unable to provide a working generic 32 and a 64bit set of binaryies for Linux? I know that lib paths and versions are different across distribtions, but can't one simply compile the thing static? Of course it'll be much larger, but I have a 1 TB harddisk which is 10% full after I copied every last mp3 and movie from external storage device onto it - I don't mind if the binary is 20 times the size. I am genuinely at a loss here. A normal Linux user has practically no change to get last stable on his box running if it isn't in his distro - a normal Windows user gets everything nice and streamlined. Does anyone else understand this? * Thorsten -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Musings on FG on Linux/Windows
Binary releases on Linux are /possible/ but a pain - working with each distro's packaging system is definitely the way to go, in my opinion. That basically seems to require that everyone who wants most recent FG needs to update to most recent Linux. Which is something which according to my experience Linux developers do, think everyone else does as well, but normal users don't. The normal Linux users I know ask someone else with a bit of background knowledge to install Linux for them and resolve the inevitable hardware problems, and then they use the package manager to get what they want - but they don't install the next version of Linux because they can't do it themselves. It's a bit like requiring Windows users to use Windows 8 if they want FG 2.8 - we don't seem to do that. * Thorsten -- Monitor your physical, virtual and cloud infrastructure from a single web console. Get in-depth insight into apps, servers, databases, vmware, SAP, cloud infrastructure, etc. Download 30-day Free Trial. Pricing starts from $795 for 25 servers or applications! http://p.sf.net/sfu/zoho_dev2dev_nov ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
