Re: [Flightgear-devel] Suggestion for a 737-family repository in FG GitLab

[Nia <fl...@sy...>]

On 2025-12-01 17:40, Ludovic Brenta wrote:
> James Turner <ja...@fl...> writes:
> [...]
>> So, in terms of reducing the number of forks, I’d *prefer*
>> GitHub/GitLab/etc but you can do what you want since in the end …
>> people can always fork it. We’re just very close to:
>> 
>> 	https://xkcd.com/927/
>> 
>> … at that point :)
> 
> It is possible to reduce the number of forks to zero by working 
> directly
> in FGAddon (where the various 737s are, already).  With git-svn, people
> used to git can get the best of both worlds: fgaddon serves as the
> central repository and they can use git locally fi they want to.

You'd be lacking things like a good issue tracker, merge requests and so 
on tho.
That's not really feasible to do with sourceforge and FGAddon.

>> In this case, the FGAddon SVN repo becomes gradually less important
>> (tending towards zero) as maintained aircraft gradually get their own
>> repos. (We’d be left with the just the attic + unmaintained acft )
> 
> Wait, is that a strategy now?  Has that been discussed or agreed?  Or
> are you trying to re-ignite the flamewar of 10 years ago that the
> infamous "FGUSER" group started?

The topic was discussed yesterday in the context of this thread. There 
wasn't full agreement and nothing has been decided. It was just an 
option to improve $something (but not the core issue this thread was 
supposed to tackle)
Also, in the 10 years, I think a good bit has changed? Sometimes it can 
be good at reviewing old ideas (trans-atlantic in a twin jet? was 
thought to be too dangerous so jets with 3 or 4 engines dominated 
that... until it got revisited... today it makes sense to fly those 
routes on twin jets... technology and circumstances change)