[Aardwolf]

It has come to my attention that the code for PCS2 is GPL'd. This means that we could create our own SVN for it, with public access (at least for download). Thus, people could do freelance programming of features and bugfixes, and it would actually be possible to get stuff done.

Note that this isn't about Kazan, as much as it is about me (and presumably others) wanting to see continuing work on PCS2.

My apologies to Kazan for stealing his baby.

[portej05]

Hi Aardwolf,

I have talked to Kazan about using PCS2 code previously.
The end result was that he'd prefer PCS2 to remain PCS2 in the sf.net repository.
While the GPL does allow you to do what you want, but mixing up the environment with random builds doesn't sounds like a good idea.

I suggest PM'ing Kazan.

[Spicious]

If you're trying to move away from one antiquated version control system, maybe you should avoid moving straight to another antiquated version control system.

[Galemp]

SVN is antiquated? News to me.

[Nuke]

pcs2 was on cvs last i checked. however i dont think many if any active coders have write access to it.

[Spicious]

SVN is antiquated? News to me.

It is compared to a distributed version control system. See the git tech talk for why. For something like this distributed should make a lot more sense than centralised anyway.

[chief1983]

Spicious, I was going to suggest github but didn't think this was the venue for the discussion.  I figured that if we did try to start a side project though, it'd be a good testbed for it since only a handful of devs would be using it.

[Spicious]

Git tends to be fairly irritating to use on Windows.

[chief1983]

It's getting better, with msysgit and TortoiseGit.  TortoiseGit has made huge advances in usability in the last year.

[Aardwolf]

On the topic of PCS2, I'll try talking to Kazan (that is, via PM) and see if he's not too unhappy with this idea, or if he has a better one.

Edit: PM sent.

[Iss Mneur]

It's getting better, with msysgit and TortoiseGit.  TortoiseGit has made huge advances in usability in the last year.

Mercurial and TortoisHG also work pretty good on windows. Its not git, but is a DVCS.

As for the topic, like I said in IRC, as it has not been updated for over a year I doubt he would have an issue with it being updated by someone else, as long as credit is given.

If confusion of the name is concern, call it PCS3.

[Kazan]

as i said in my PM - i would prefer it stay in my CVS repository at sf.net, but I will gladly add people to the contributor list so they can commit.

if you really really want we can migrate it to my SF.net SVN


and screw your "omg X is antiquiate, use GIT" crap, i'm tired of hearing that where ever i go.  there is no good technical reason to use GIT over SVN as far as I've seen - just more of the "it's a bunch of trendy ideas tossed into a pot!" crap that i've seen infecting the OSS community [another example: pulseaudio]

(i sound like an old man saying "damn kids! get off my lawn!")

[Dragon]

When you will finish debating about whether to use Tortoise SVN or not, can you consider adding Modelview-like shield mesh editor to PCS2?
Currently, it's the only adventage Modelview has over PCS2.
I'd also like to be able to edit the position of shield mesh, just like it's possible in case of subobjects.
And I'd like to see squadron insygnia editor similar to one that was in PCS1, but, if possible, easier to use.

[chief1983]

I think those have been on the roadmap for a while already.  They'd likely get implemented if there were people working on PCS again.

[Aardwolf]

There was also the one "show-stopping" bug on Intel-cards which caused the (attempted) rendering of omnipoints to crash PCS2 --- something to do with VBOs.

Anyway, it's good to hear you're willing to let more people contribute.

[chief1983]

Kazan, also, I wasn't excited about git until I started using it here at work.  Now that I have, I'm in love with it, and think simply using git instead of svn would make even the SCP development more fluid.  The branching support is far ahead of that in SVN, which isn't really branching at all.  Just take a look at these arguments for git.  Git would actually help you handle code input from multiple developers on PCS2.  Just look at some of the workflow examples.  I've got no problem leaving it where it is, although I'd rather have SVN than CVS personally.

[Bobboau]

it might not be a bad idea to move PCS2 under FSO, the two projects are obviously tightly related, and even though PCS2 is designed to be able to handle more file formats, let's face it, the name has POF in the acronym. I might want to get back to coding for it after this semester and it would be a whole lot easier if the administrator of the repository was active.

note: I do NOT feel strongly about this. just saying the idea has merit.

P.S. is there a linux IDE project of some sort set up for PCS2, I've been using kubuntu for the last few months and this would be a great way to get my feet wet in coding for linux.

[Spicious]

as i said in my PM - i would prefer it stay in my CVS repository at sf.net, but I will gladly add people to the contributor list so they can commit.

A big advantage of DVCS is avoiding this problem almost entirely. Tech talk.

PCS2 will not compile under GCC. I suspect something like the template subclasses not being declared correctly according to the spec.

[portej05]

Request thread split!

I suggest putting it in SVN@SF and adding someone who can moderate patches for it until this is all figured out.

[Bobboau]

PCS2 will not compile under GCC. I suspect something like the template subclasses not being declared correctly according to the spec.

tell me more
I thought I did everything correctly and I thought the recent versions of visual studio were more standards compliant, though I suppose more != completely. and there is some major template usage going on.