Talk:Source code repository policy

> Just a main-question for all:

> Do we really want to upload every *.blend file, every *.xcf file

Yes, because otherwise people will not be able use their right to make modifications to the images.

> (nor raw, because the most people don't work with raw, as I know and the source IS the xcf-Gimpf-file)

> Furthermore I do not believe, that we should upload the source of music...

Whatever is released, the source should come with it.

> For example: If you write a song on guitar, record it and want to contibute it to widelands, what would be the source there?

If I have written the song down in musical notation, a file (created with for example NoteEdit), would be suitable. If I have written lyrics for it, I would include them in the NoteEdit file. But since the recording itself is also a piece of artwork (it is not trivial to generate it from the notation), it should be included as well, in a lossless format of course (flac, not lossy ogg). If I have first recorded the guitar sound, then recorded the voice sound and mixed it together, I should of course publish the 2 recordings separately, not the mixed version.

>-> I suppose, (if there REALLY is a problem with GPL),

The GPL is not a problem, we just have to follow it. Doing that should not be any problem.

> that we put all artwork under different free license,

I see no advantage with that. Is there a reason why you think that we should not follow the intentions of the GPL?

> but I can't believe this, because I haven't seen a project, yet, that put such src on repository....

> Please think about.

> Further comment by Nasenbaer:

> Okay, you are right there, but than I suppose, to upload this stuff to our file-gallery (where blend and xcf-files are allready uploaded to).

The file gallery does not have version control as far as I can see. And the only files I can see there are 3 lonely xfc (no blender). Version control is needed to get some order among all the files and versions.

> In repository they would take too much space... For example: for me (and bedouin has same problem) it would be too much because I use 56k modem (Bedouin 32k modem) and checking out a repository, with source of every music-track would take a ugly long time and would be very expensive for us.

The files would also take up space in the file gallery. Subversion can comress files during transfer (they call it "wire compression").

> -> The only possibility I see for SVN would be, to create a second trunk beside "trunk", which isn't checked out, when you just want the main-widelands-repository.

Yes, and it could be called "artwork".

> And another question is: > what is with all the pictures and the music-files, which are allready included.

We should try to get as many of them as possible.

> I don't believe, that the creator kept the sources...

We should find out.

> For me I can say, I didn't kept them :-/..

That is bad. This shows that it is important to keep sources in svn so they do not get lost like that. How bad it is depends on what kind of data it was. If it was pixelpainted images, I guess it is not such a huge difference between a xcf and png, while it is worse to lose a blender model.