Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Suggestion for a 737-family repository in FG GitLab
|
From: Nia <fl...@sy...> - 2025-12-01 13:43:41
|
On 12/1/25 14:32, Israel Emmanuel wrote: > Is Github/Gitlab a software forge? I thought of them as just cloud > storage providers, more or less. Yes, they are more than a storage provider. > I personally would trust Github or at > least Gitlab to handle my repository better than any self-hosted > repository, and I know I'm not alone. Trust by which metric tho? It still being there in 10 years? Yes! It getting abused to train AI on it without your consent? You can basically bet on that too! ... big reason to not trust these platforms! > I suppose you can work it out with > the people who will actually be putting real effort into it, but I sense > that a more popular platform will be the optimal solution for a 737 > reboot. We will have to wait and see. The problem with this thinking is, you'll be for ever stuck with what's popular right now... a popular platform that gets worse and worse, like Github did a lot in the last years, will remain popular while new platforms don't get a chance... But in the beginning, Github wasn't popular either... someone had to make the first repo there... so why not take the step now, when establishing a new repo anyways? Always easier than moving somewhen in the future. Forgejo will become a quite viable option once it got good federation support, rn it has that one big downside which will be solved with federation. > > Get Outlook for Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > *From:* Xavier Del Campo Romero via Flightgear-devel <flightgear- > de...@li...> > *Sent:* Monday, December 1, 2025 3:27:53 AM > *To:* fli...@li... <flightgear- > de...@li...> > *Cc:* Xavier Del Campo Romero <xa...@di...> > *Subject:* Re: [Flightgear-devel] Suggestion for a 737-family repository > in FG GitLab > Hi James, > > Sorry for the delayed answer. > > I think the point behind their suggestion [1] was to ensure the project > does not fall into the Bermuda Triangle category [2] whenever the > repository disappears for whatever reason. Actually, to be honest I > would prefer Forgejo (which I self-host [3], btw) over GitLab, > SourceForge, GitHub or any other proprietary software forge. > > Best regards, > > Xavi > > [1]: https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=436580#p436580 > <https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=436580#p436580> > [2]: https://wiki.flightgear.org/Category:Bermuda_Triangle <https:// > wiki.flightgear.org/Category:Bermuda_Triangle> > [3]: https://gitea.privatedns.org/ <https://gitea.privatedns.org/> > > On 11/27/25 13:15, James Turner wrote: >> >> >>> On 26 Nov 2025, at 14:42, Xavier Del Campo Romero via >>> Flightgear-devel <fli...@li...> wrote: >>> >>> Then, I was suggested [6] to write to this mailing list so that an >>> official repository for the 737 family in GitLab, so at least the >>> repository is always governed by the FlightGear community and is >>> therefore not abandoned, like happened with the others before it. >>> >>> I cannot guarantee I can actively work in the 737 (mostly because of >>> other projects and IRL stuff), but nonetheless I think the suggestion >>> above is a good first step to improve the current situation. From a >>> first glance, the 737-800YV looks like the most mature >>> implementation, even if I suspect its repository contains a few >>> non-free assets that should be reviewed. The intention is to cover >>> all 737 variants within this repository, if possible. >>> >>> Please let me know your feedback. >> >> Hi Xavier, >> >> We can easily make you a project on GitLab, *but* you can also just do >> this yourself (on GitLab, or GitHub, or anywhere). And you can maybe >> guess, there is nothing ‘official’ when you do this, because we >> actually no such concept as any ‘official’ aircraft development repo, >> and indeed, no one has ever defined what that would mean :) >> >> (We do have aircraft included in FGaddon, which have to follow certain >> rules, eg being GPL, allowing bug-fixes from anyone, but FGaddon is >> really a distribution mechanism now, it’s not the same as a GitLab/Hub >> project for development work - unless you’re of course happy with pure >> SVN and no bug tracker) >> >> We **could** start making aircraft as sub-projects of the FlightGear >> *group* on GitLab, but I’m slightly worried about that for a few of >> reasons: >> >> - we have some account limits for the group, not the project >> (especially around storage, users) >> - our open-source account requires checking every project inside for >> compliance, each year. (And I really don’t want a minor issue with one >> acft to impact the whole group) >> There’s also some combined resources, eg the group-level issue tracker >> would then include issues in your aircraft project. This might be >> considered an advantage or disadvantage, depending on how well or >> badly, the bugs are triaged and maintained :D >> >> Finally there’s also the question above of what ‘official’ means: in >> terms of core development, we aren’t going to treat an aircraft any >> differently because it’s inside the group than outside, but users >> might perceive it that way, and that seems like it might cause politics. >> >> Given this, I’d say life is simpler if you just make a project on your >> provider of choice (which might be GitLab), and pull in whatever >> existing 737 resources you need (since it’s all GPL), and if the >> result meets the standard criteria of being obviously better than the >> existing aircraft in FGaddon, we can do the established procedure, of >> moving the older/unmaintained acft to the ‘attic’ and making the new >> one the ‘official’ (hah) one in FGaddon. >> >> Kind regards, >> James >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Flightgear-devel mailing list >> Fli...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel <https:// > lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Fli...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel <https:// > lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel> > > > _______________________________________________ > Flightgear-devel mailing list > Fli...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel |
