Talk:Airport data (apt.dat) update: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:::: When I can choose between two sources of data: one having all kind of infrastructure in place to ensure easy maintenance and dozens of contributors, and one with no infrastructure and just a single commiter, I'd choose for the first option... | :::: When I can choose between two sources of data: one having all kind of infrastructure in place to ensure easy maintenance and dozens of contributors, and one with no infrastructure and just a single commiter, I'd choose for the first option... | ||
:::: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] 11:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC) | :::: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] 11:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC) | ||
:::: I understand your points, GiJs. But the idea of (officially) releasing *up-to-date* apt.dat data means: | |||
::::* Having the ability of keeping track (publicly visible) of the changed data through version control. | |||
::::* Offering the possibility to a group of multiple people to publish "releases", which can be argued and officially announced. (e.g. official "master" tree). | |||
::::* Offering to *anyone* to contribute to the source data directly withouth obstacles. | |||
::::* Offering *anyone* to pull *any* version of the data, not just the latest one. | |||
::::* Disposing of the fact that Robin is unresponsive to data correction submissions. (I have waited 11 months to receive a cheap answer to my e-mail to Robin, saying that he is too busy...) | |||
::::Regarding your questions: | |||
::::* Who would maintain the "official" master tree | |||
:::: I would be most happy to let the FG dev team name and appoint the individuals forming some sort of "official data" group. - They would be the ones drafting rules for data submissions (format, procedure etc.) in the first place. | |||
::::* Robin's data | |||
:::: Frankly spoken I don't care about Robin's data any longer, as it is largely out of data and out of accuracy. I wrote my own awk shell script, which converts my navigraph data into apt.dat and that does a wonderful job for my personal use. I don't pull Robin's data any longer... | |||
::::* "Conflict" | |||
:::: There would not be a "conflict", as Robin's data simply is not accurate any longer and in case of a "official fg data release group" a possible conflict could be argued, then discussed and decided. - Not by one single person that only has a focus on local airports and nav data, but by an international community. | |||
::::* Conversions | |||
:::: Conversions can simply be made by awk, sql, etc. there are large tools available and this is not an issue yet. | |||
::::So. - Having the ability of bringing apt.dat to the next generation or remaining dependent to one single, unresponsive maintainer... Make a wise joice. | |||
::::[[User:Mcantsin|Mcantsin]] 12:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:44, 28 February 2013
Independent apt.dat source
I would like to suggest to use an independent, community based source for apt.dat data, such as this project on github. Mcantsin 01:57, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- Then maybe you can explain what is not independent and community based on Robin's data? It's GPL and a new release is around the corner. --Papillon81 11:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- If you read the description you will learn why. Mcantsin 11:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Luther,
- Your GitHub is also maintained by a single maintainer (you), right? So how's that different, other than being a Git repository?
- The idea in itself is interesting, but I see lots of issues, just to name a few:
- How would you deal with merging back changes that are made to the official data?
- Do changes made in your repository get merged in Robin's?
- What if your and Robin's data conflict; who is "right"?
- What if a new apt.dat format is designed, how will you be able to convert the data to that new format?
- When I can choose between two sources of data: one having all kind of infrastructure in place to ensure easy maintenance and dozens of contributors, and one with no infrastructure and just a single commiter, I'd choose for the first option...
- Gijs 11:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- I understand your points, GiJs. But the idea of (officially) releasing *up-to-date* apt.dat data means:
- Having the ability of keeping track (publicly visible) of the changed data through version control.
- Offering the possibility to a group of multiple people to publish "releases", which can be argued and officially announced. (e.g. official "master" tree).
- Offering to *anyone* to contribute to the source data directly withouth obstacles.
- Offering *anyone* to pull *any* version of the data, not just the latest one.
- Disposing of the fact that Robin is unresponsive to data correction submissions. (I have waited 11 months to receive a cheap answer to my e-mail to Robin, saying that he is too busy...)
- If you read the description you will learn why. Mcantsin 11:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- Then maybe you can explain what is not independent and community based on Robin's data? It's GPL and a new release is around the corner. --Papillon81 11:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- Regarding your questions:
- Who would maintain the "official" master tree
- I would be most happy to let the FG dev team name and appoint the individuals forming some sort of "official data" group. - They would be the ones drafting rules for data submissions (format, procedure etc.) in the first place.
- Robin's data
- Frankly spoken I don't care about Robin's data any longer, as it is largely out of data and out of accuracy. I wrote my own awk shell script, which converts my navigraph data into apt.dat and that does a wonderful job for my personal use. I don't pull Robin's data any longer...
- "Conflict"
- There would not be a "conflict", as Robin's data simply is not accurate any longer and in case of a "official fg data release group" a possible conflict could be argued, then discussed and decided. - Not by one single person that only has a focus on local airports and nav data, but by an international community.
- Conversions
- Conversions can simply be made by awk, sql, etc. there are large tools available and this is not an issue yet.
- Regarding your questions:
- So. - Having the ability of bringing apt.dat to the next generation or remaining dependent to one single, unresponsive maintainer... Make a wise joice.
- Mcantsin 12:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)