Am 27.10.2011 16:06, schrieb Melchior FRANZ:
a leader is someone who*leads*. "Leadership by not leading"
(and being proud of it) isn't a leadership style in my book.
There are many kinds of leadership: authoritative, cooperative, relaxed,
[..]
The trick is to pick the best for the current s
* Jari Häkkinen -- Thursday 27 October 2011:
> Didn't Franz Melchior loose some interest in fg due to a
> "freedom" clash.
I didn't lose interest in fg -- I only lost interest in developing
for FlightGear after the project "leader" let one developer push
the project in a very bad direction, and f
On 2011-10-27 14.29, Curtis Olson wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:09 AM, James Turner wrote:
>
>>
>> On 27 Oct 2011, at 12:58, Jari Häkkinen wrote:
>>
>>> Sorry for the rant-like appearance of this message.
>>
>> No need to apologise, I'd say it's 100% accurate - including the lack of a
>> singl
On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 7:09 AM, James Turner wrote:
>
> On 27 Oct 2011, at 12:58, Jari Häkkinen wrote:
>
> > Sorry for the rant-like appearance of this message.
>
> No need to apologise, I'd say it's 100% accurate - including the lack of a
> single leader, the fact that project does 'okay' withou
On 27 Oct 2011, at 10:35, Heiko Schulz wrote:
>> The procedure is to ask :)
>
> Aha, really?- in the 5-6 years I'm contributing to FlightGear-Project I did
> this twice. I never got an answer. And until now I can only guess what was
> the reasons for.
Problem is, as you already realised - *I*
On 27 Oct 2011, at 12:58, Jari Häkkinen wrote:
> Sorry for the rant-like appearance of this message.
No need to apologise, I'd say it's 100% accurate - including the lack of a
single leader, the fact that project does 'okay' without very tight central
leadership, mostly, and the attendant resp
On 2011-10-27 11.35, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> And who makes sure and decides that those people really keeps to all those
> rules?
The project lead (or leader) should make decisions and of course be well
in tune with the lead developers, developers, and with the fg community.
As a bystander it is d
> Hope so ;-)
>
> With the current setup you can for example commit (and accept merge
> requests) for your EC130:https://gitorious.org/flightgear-aircraft/ec130
>
> But I want to give commit rights to my wife to my repo, without asking
> you, can I do that ? Why not ? What gives "the team" the righ
Am 27.10.11 10:24, schrieb James Turner:
> 'we' (the infamous FlightGear we) should probably write a wiki page of
> aircraft-contributor-etiquette, so we have grounds to revoke people's access
> if they break the rules. Though just about the only rules I'm aware of :
>
> keep it GPL
Hi Gary, > The #1 reason I haven't added my projects (MD-81, Grumman Goose,
> Edgley Optica, Velocity XL RG) to the repository is that I have no
> ability to perform my own commits.
Which is exactly one of the things that we're working on with the FGData
split:http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightG
On 2011-10-27 10.24, James Turner wrote:
> Actually, that's not quite accurate, but, the procedure is to ask,
> *having demonstrated yourself to be a sane and reasonable person
> who's likely to stick around longer than four weeks*. I'm a bit more
> liberal in this regard, but essentially anyone wh
On 27 Oct 2011, at 01:28, Gary Neely wrote:
> The #1 reason I haven't added my projects (MD-81, Grumman Goose,
> Edgley Optica, Velocity XL RG) to the repository is that I have no
> ability to perform my own commits. Possibly I haven't earned the right
> and I can understand that. But I would lik
On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 7:33 PM, HB-GRAL wrote:
> Am 25.10.11 18:54, schrieb Gijs de Rooy:
>> No matter what aircraft-split we end up with, aircraft authors will always
>> be able to update their own aircraft at
>> any time.
>
> Hope so ;-)
>
> With the current setup you can for example commit (a
Hi Gijs
Am 25.10.11 18:54, schrieb Gijs de Rooy:
> No matter what aircraft-split we end up with, aircraft authors will always be
> able to update their own aircraft at
> any time.
Hope so ;-)
With the current setup you can for example commit (and accept merge
requests) for your EC130:https://g
Am 25.10.11 19:09, schrieb syd adams:
> I dont personally see any advantage myself, I'd have to vote no.Sorry Yves.
>
> --
> The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
> demand for specialized net
> On the other side clone each of the 300+ aircraft isn't that comfortable as
> well.
There are various ways to tackle that problem. One could write a script to
clone/pull all
the aircraft with a single click, but an even nicer solution might be to use
"submodules",
as mentioned at the wiki (
Hello,
>there was little input on the fgdata split and few people speaking up
>when things were started. We do see a lot of responses now - many being
>in favor of the change, but also concerns about remaining issues.
>Indeed, setting up the new repo isn't as simple as it seemed initially,
>and
I dont personally see any advantage myself, I'd have to vote no.Sorry Yves.
--
The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the
demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly.
Ta
Hi, good to see some more factual discussions. Let me emphasize that anyone is
welcome to add/edit
concerns/questions/answers/solution to the wiki:
http://wiki.flightgear.org/FlightGear_Git:_splitting_fgdata
> Those who have commit rights are already busy with their own stuff. For a new
> airc
Hello,
>IMHO that adds another not very logical layer of complication for little
>>gain. There's a nice "democratic" aspect to every aircraft being in a
>>single central repository, and reduced opportunities for those "clique" >type
>groups that so naturally spring up and are divisive and very
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 00:18:36 +0200
HB-GRAL wrote:
> Hi Core (and the rest of the entire organism of course)
> Why not splitting up the Aircraft folder into hangars as collection of
> aircrafts as plug-ins, collection of big teams or small but heavy
> industries ?
IMHO that adds another not ver
Hi Core (and the rest of the entire organism of course)
Why not splitting up the Aircraft folder into hangars as collection of
aircrafts as plug-ins, collection of big teams or small but heavy
industries ?
--- fgdata
|
Aircraft
||
|
On 10/20/11, ThorstenB wrote:
> Hi FlightGear,
>
> there was little input on the fgdata split and few people speaking up
> when things were started. We do see a lot of responses now - many being
> in favor of the change, but also concerns about remaining issues.
> Indeed, setting up the new repo i
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 00:10:29 +0200
ThorstenB wrote:
> We are really sorry for any inconvenience and misunderstandings this
> further change may cause. But now, as we have everybody's attention on
> the subject, we're looking forward to many people testing the proposed
> changes. We also invite
Hi FlightGear,
there was little input on the fgdata split and few people speaking up
when things were started. We do see a lot of responses now - many being
in favor of the change, but also concerns about remaining issues.
Indeed, setting up the new repo isn't as simple as it seemed initially,
25 matches
Mail list logo
