[Kazan]

Why will no one skip SVN in the VCS chain?

I quite like the idea of splitting the pcs2 backend from the frontend. (I was going to suggest it...)

A) because the alternatives are not hugely better than SVN
B) the backend and the frontend are not very tightly bound to start with.  the changes in head that made it unstable are actually UI changes

oh.. and i really need to go.. you've made me late for work!

[headdie]

why are we having this fight?  having the two programs being developed will be an asset to the comunity, at the end of the day one program will always be better at some things and the other better others, this will happen because the prioritys of one dev group will be different to the others so can we drop the pissing contest, agree to share info when needed and see what happens, you are both SCP and adults so start behaving like it not two spoilt brats trying to one up your school projects

[The E]

[edit2] what files are missing from the repo?

Code: [Select]

1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'wxCTreeCtrl.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'PCS2_MainPanel.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_weapons.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_turrets.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_thrusters.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_textures.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_subsystems.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_subobjects.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_paths.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_header.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_glows.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_docking.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'kaz_templates.cpp': No such file or directory

2) please don't rip code from my app to use in modelview.  if you have a problem with the UI, improve it.

Could you elaborate on why I shouldn't? What I am doing pretty much amounts to ripping out the backend of modelview and replacing it with PCS2's. Given the limited amount of coders available, that seems to be the best option, as having a common backend for both allows shared development.

C) side by side comparison of functionality? PCS2 wins hands down as it is designed to be a model converter and meta data editor from the start.  Modelview bolted those features on as an afterthought.

Okay. One thing ModelView does better is support for files in VPs. Its Textures list is better as well (as in, it gives you a preview of the texture separated from the model).
It's various toolbars are better organized (IMHO). It has a working shield editor.
To be fair, PCS2 is better in that it has editors for all model information. ModelView kinda lacks editors for dockpoints, paths and glowpoints at the moment, which is just a bit embarassing.

Now, UI design is something where you can't please everybody. For myself, ModelView as a whole presents a friendlier UI that I, for one, find easier to work with.

why are we having this fight?  having the two programs being developed will be an asset to the comunity, at the end of the day one program will always be better at some things and the other better others, this will happen because the prioritys of one dev group will be different to the others so can we drop the pissing contest, agree to share info when needed and see what happens, you are both SCP and adults so start behaving like it not two spoilt brats trying to one up your school projects

As far as I am concerned, this is not a fight. Kazan has his opinions on the subject of developing PCS2, I have mine. Other people have other opinions. For the moment, I am just trying to understand the reasoning behind Kazan's opinions. But I don't react particularly well to being told that I can't or shouldn't do something without some reason.

[Spicious]

A) because the alternatives are not hugely better than SVN

This might be relevant if the repo was already using SVN. Given that it isn't, the fact that the alternatives are in fact better than SVN makes them the obvious choice.

[The E]

As a recent convert to git, I would have to support that statement.

[chief1983]

Ah crap, I think I continued this discussion in two other threads before I realized this is where it's really going on.

Git please.  For god's sake please move it to git.  SVN is not a serious improvement over CVS, whereas git (or a proper DVCS in general) is orders of magnitude better than either CVS or SVN.  And the fact that Sourceforge has Git, Mercurial, and Bazaar support should mean it's not a problem at all to keep it on SF.

Kaz, I would love to see PCS2's interface developed over ModelView, but no level of improvements are going to convince everyone that it's hands down more usable.  We can probably win some over with some fixes and changes, but I don't see any reason to stifle the recent interest in modernizing ModelView, if it at the same time will bring improvements to PCS2.  I've already discussed this with The_E on IRC, and I think that using a common backend for bother apps would benefit everyone in the end.  If you want, it doesn't even need to be in the core, the beauty of Git means that The_E could work on the PCS2 core backend and keep the ModelView stuff in a separate branch, and they could still easily stay in sync, much much more easily than with Subversion.  Breaking the PCS2 backend into a fully discrete library/object would probably be very helpful though.

The_E, Kaz is right in that the reason ModelView is lacking some of those 'embarrassing' features is that they were never planned.  The editing capabilities were a bolt-on afterthought as he said.  PCS2 was designed from the start as an editor, and even went through a long design process where any suggestions to the interface could have been suggested, but what we have now is what it evolved into.  If it's less than desirable, that is as much the modding community's fault as theirs

But seriously guys, there's no reason we can't all pull together into one active project where everyone wins, is there?

[The E]

The_E, Kaz is right in that the reason ModelView is lacking some of those 'embarrassing' features is that they were never planned.  The editing capabilities were a bolt-on afterthought as he said.  PCS2 was designed from the start as an editor, and even went through a long design process where any suggestions to the interface could have been suggested, but what we have now is what it evolved into.  If it's less than desirable, that is as much the modding community's fault as theirs

Well, I like to think that the reason these things are missing has more to do with the project being abandoned 8 or so years ago. I mean, it's clear that an implementation was planned, but not started. Should be easy to add though, once I get the backend sorted.

Agreed on all other points, though.

[chief1983]

Abandoned or not, they weren't part of the original plan.  I'm downright amazed that ModelView works as an editor half as well as it does.

[Nuke]

me personally i wouldnt mind seeing as many of the classic modeling tools brought up to spec. modelview, styxx's max converter (especially this one), maybe even aurora (or maybe not). pcs2 as an editor is pretty good now if you disregard the ui related crashes. my holy grail of model conversion however has always been to convert a model without any post conversion editing, a quick test of the collada importer kinda saw that happen (how comprehensive it is has yet to be seen, by me at least). my biggest problem with pcs2 is that it hasnt changed a whole lot lately, the collada builds are still kinda buggy. i had even considered trying to work on the code. at least a couple times in the last 4 months i attempted to compile it with very little success (should give the_e's procedure a go next time i feel up to coding). id rather use svn simply on the grounds that its what fs2 uses and i could just use one client for everything. i had a problem recently with the icon overlays in tortoise svn because i had also installed tortoise cvs so i could download pcs2.

[Kazan]

[edit2] what files are missing from the repo?

Code: [Select]

1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'wxCTreeCtrl.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'PCS2_MainPanel.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_weapons.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_turrets.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_thrusters.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_textures.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_subsystems.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_subobjects.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_paths.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_header.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_glows.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'pe_docking.cpp': No such file or directory
1>c1xx : fatal error C1083: Cannot open source file: 'kaz_templates.cpp': No such file or directory

ah.. compiling on non-windows... if you're using the Makefile it's out of date... use SCons for non-windows builds

 

2) please don't rip code from my app to use in modelview.  if you have a problem with the UI, improve it.

Could you elaborate on why I shouldn't? What I am doing pretty much amounts to ripping out the backend of modelview and replacing it with PCS2's. Given the limited amount of coders available, that seems to be the best option, as having a common backend for both allows shared development.

for starters - because it's my code and I asked you not to.  because:
A) Modelview's frontend is non-portable
B) modelview's frontend wasn't designed to be an editor from the start
C) because I'd rather concentrate programming effort on something worthwhile

C) side by side comparison of functionality? PCS2 wins hands down as it is designed to be a model converter and meta data editor from the start.  Modelview bolted those features on as an afterthought.

Okay. One thing ModelView does better is support for files in VPs. Its Textures list is better as well (as in, it gives you a preview of the texture separated from the model).
It's various toolbars are better organized (IMHO). It has a working shield editor.
To be fair, PCS2 is better in that it has editors for all model information. ModelView kinda lacks editors for dockpoints, paths and glowpoints at the moment, which is just a bit embarassing.

Shields are mesh, and should be edited as such.  Implementing mesh editing was on the TO DO list for PCS2.  What's wrong with PCS2s support for textures in VPs?  and i'm not sure what you mean "preview of the texture separated from the model"

Now, UI design is something where you can't please everybody. For myself, ModelView as a whole presents a friendlier UI that I, for one, find easier to work with.

but what is substantially different about the UI that makes this so, that it isn't just easier to correct in the already cross platform portable UI code in PCS2?

As far as I am concerned, this is not a fight. Kazan has his opinions on the subject of developing PCS2, I have mine. Other people have other opinions. For the moment, I am just trying to understand the reasoning behind Kazan's opinions. But I don't react particularly well to being told that I can't or shouldn't do something without some reason.

I asked you nicely not to fracture my codebase, and not to rip my code for use in other applications.

if it comes down to it: PCS2 isn't GPL.  In fact I haven't applied a specific license to it.  any and all usage of my code goes through me - it's my code.

[Kazan]

oh.. and as i speak i'm cleaning up my copies of the source for prepping to migrate to (by popular demand *Drumroll*) SF's Git

Spici would you PLEASE PM me your SF.net user so that I can add you to write access, and would you please merge all your changes into 2_0-fixes - i'm going to base the new Repo off stable (2_0-fixes)

[edit]
actual branch name is "stable_2_0_fixes"

i might merge head.. i'm not sure.. i'm goin through the diffs between stable_2_0_fixes now.. one of them was reverting out my templates (kaz_*) because of updating to modern MSVC copies with decent STL support

[edit2]

yes.. commit your changes to HEAD please... there is more development in it than i thought.  some of the changes have made the codebase unstable but i'll try to debug them out before i migrate us to GIT - but i need your changes first Spici

[The E]

for starters - because it's my code and I asked you not to.  because:
A) Modelview's frontend is non-portable
B) modelview's frontend wasn't designed to be an editor from the start
C) because I'd rather concentrate programming effort on something worthwhile

A and B are reasons why the conversion will be nontrivial (A fact of which I am aware).
C is questionable. There are people out there who prefer modelview to PCS2. How a combined effort to bring both applications on the same level to serve both groups is not worthwhile is quite beyond me.
And while you are fully correct in saying that it is your code, you also made the decision to make that code public. That means that everyone, even one such as I, can go and take it to do whatever I want with it, in accordance with the license under which that code was released.
And I am quite sorry, but in this instance, I am not inclined to bow to your wishes just because you ask me to. If there are technical reasons why something is impossible, I am willing to listen to them. If it boils down to "because I don't want you to", I will ignore you. That's how I see it.

ah.. compiling on non-windows... if you're using the Makefile it's out of date... use SCons for non-windows builds

Actually, no. I'm using Visual Studio 2010.

Shields are mesh, and should be edited as such.  Implementing mesh editing was on the TO DO list for PCS2.  What's wrong with PCS2s support for textures in VPs?  and i'm not sure what you mean "preview of the texture separated from the model"

On the TO DO list. Good. Nice to hear.
As for the support for textures in VPs, nothing is wrong with it per se. But if you look at modelview, it allows you to look at models in vps without extracting them from the vp first. It also allows you to edit those models (although, and this is certainly a good thing, it can't repackage those vps).

but what is substantially different about the UI that makes this so, that it isn't just easier to correct in the already cross platform portable UI code in PCS2?

For me personally, the fact that I can use the standard MFC editors on it is a big plus.

I asked you nicely not to fracture my codebase, and not to rip my code for use in other applications.

if it comes down to it: PCS2 isn't GPL.  In fact I haven't applied a specific license to it.  any and all usage of my code goes through me - it's my code.

Why would my efforts fracture your codebase? Am I committing breaking changes to your version control system without consulting you? Am I distributing builds that are not approved by you? Am I asking you to fix my bugs?
Also, since your code is hosted on SourceForge, permission to fork your code is sort of implicated. Unless you decide to make PCS2 closed source, in which case already released code is still released, and the fork can continue anyway.
I am very sorry about this escalation, but I have little to no respect for this sort of behaviour. What I see here is your desire to keep the development effort centralized. Which I can understand and appreciate. What I cannot understand is your insistence that ALL development has to be approved by you.

[Kazan]

[redacted]

discussed on IRC


The_E (And anyone who wants to help) is going to work on enhancing PCS2's UI To be much more awesome
I'll try to work on the back end as time allows to start implementing my backlog of 2.1 roadmap changes

anyone else who wants to help feel free.


now... SF.net GIT, or Github? which is better to people.  i'm looking through OSI-approved licenses tryin to decide which one to officially put the code under.

[The E]

I think we have reached an agreement here (well, not here, but on #hard-light, if you get my drift).

Bottom line is that I will probably discontinue working on modelview, but that PCS2 will get a much better UI.

As for project hosting, I'm fine with either of those. Although I prefer github for its cleaner layout.

[Kazan]

I think we have reached an agreement here (well, not here, but on #hard-light, if you get my drift).
 PCS2 will get a much better UI.

this makes me a very happy coder


[edit]
The E got me a copy of Spici's changes.. and i've merged them.. so i should be able to move us onto Git this weekend

[chief1983]

Excellent.  Kaz, if you'd like to set me up with access as well my SF username is also chief1983.  And if anyone needs any Git help, I'm available.  I mostly work with command line, but I might be able to figure out TortoiseGit if anyone needs help with that.  But command line Git is so powerful.  Bob, you can ditch TortoiseCVS and just use TortoiseSVN if you want.

One of the nicest things about Git is that if we wanted to move off of Sourceforge later, it's painfully easy compared to Subversion.  So I'm not really picky at all about that either, put it wherever you want.

[Trivial Psychic]

And so it came to pass that the great coding forces of Kazan and The_E had been in conflict.  They each possessed their own visions of what the community needed and desired.  Then, just when it seemed that the gulf between them would widen to insurmountable proportions, stunting further progress, the two came to see the reason in each others viewpoints and concluded that for the good of the community, that they should join forces.  Combining their individual skills, Kazan and The_E, along with their supporters, would together strive to do that which neither could do on their own... create the most stable, feature-filled, and user-friendly model editing tool in existence, and in doing so, usher in an era of modding prosperity for all in the Freespace Community.

Here's to the new alliance. 

No offense to the other team members whose names I left out... it just seemed to fit.

[chief1983]

Yeah I don't know what happened in IRC, but I'm now extremely happy.  I have _got_ to go read Anna's logs...

[Goober5000]

I am skeptical.  I would much rather see stuff moved into ModelView from PCS2 than the other way around.

Also...

if it comes down to it: PCS2 isn't GPL.  In fact I haven't applied a specific license to it.

The attachment disagrees with you.  (See below.)

any and all usage of my code goes through me - it's my code.

We had this argument back when you first started adding FS2NetD to FSO.  After Inquisitor confronted you, you agreed to not restrict the rights of others to play with code you had publicly released as open-source.  Even though this is not FSO code, the same principle applies.

I don't know the details of the agreement between you and The E (which I plan to inquire about) but I felt these points should be mentioned.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Kazan]

Goob we've already come to an agreement. kindly redact your post. 

PS: grandfathered in at SF
PPS: courts would most likely find that clause of their TOS an unconscionable clause
PPPS: that agreement with Inqui only applied to code I added to FSO.