20,741
edits
TerraSync: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→News
(→News) |
(→News) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
|added = May 2nd, 2016 | |added = May 2nd, 2016 | ||
|script_version = 0.28 | |script_version = 0.28 | ||
}} | |||
</ref> | |||
The technique of the http repository is much simpler than that of the svn repository and it will be pretty simple to create a local mirror or to download chunks of data. With a bit of to-be-developed scripting (python e.g.) there is no need to download existing data again. I don't know how terramaster works but I am sure it is easy to adapt to the new http access method. <ref>{{cite web | |||
|url = https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/35062543/ | |||
|title = <nowiki>Re: [Flightgear-devel] The future of terrasync</nowiki> | |||
|author = <nowiki>Torsten Dreyer</nowiki> | |||
|date = May 4th, 2016 | |||
|added = May 4th, 2016 | |||
|script_version = 0.31 | |||
}} | |||
</ref> | |||
The goal is to completely remove SVN and only use the HTTP repository. I'd like to reach that goal better sooner than later as we currently have two single-points of failure for the SVN-service. The first is the http://scenery.flightgear.org/svn-service web service (runs on a private web server) and the second is the one-and-only svn-server available for public access, also hosted on a private server. If either on of those fails, the SVN-terrasync is dead. I have learned the hard way that not having a fallback is a bad idea.<ref>{{cite web | |||
|url = https://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/mailman/message/35062543/ | |||
|title = <nowiki>Re: [Flightgear-devel] The future of terrasync</nowiki> | |||
|author = <nowiki>Torsten Dreyer</nowiki> | |||
|date = May 4th, 2016 | |||
|added = May 4th, 2016 | |||
|script_version = 0.31 | |||
}} | }} | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||