[eric from trainsim]

Dunno, folks. I'm struggling to understand the fascination with this, or with intentionally excluding payware and membership models.

VfS has far more potential to simplify route acquisition and deployment.

And, I'll state the obvious... what good is integrating with GitHub for works in progress if there's no official editor?...

I'm investing a lot of my time in making some overdue changes to TSRE, and integrating with GitHub is not anywhere on the radar. But including the config files needed for VFS support might be if that were to be an ORTS team priority.

[Jack@Elvas]

rickloader, on 29 February 2024 - 02:49 AM, said:

I welcome this development. It will be helpful to users by simplifying route acquisition which must further the OR cause.
Github is now established as having many advantages for routebuilders ( providers) . The facility of WIP continuous development and allowing several collabotators, being very valuable.

There maybe a snag. with ,zip in Git hub download. If the code is invoking Github .zip download I find that this is unreliable and often misses files from the download. Possibly the ..zip is not pointing at the current repository but at a previous stage such as the misleading "latest version" label.
Users never report problems with a faulty download . I think they just give up
Download from the Github app "desktop" is reliable, but I think users are reluctant to use this even though it also allows easy updates.
So i suggest providers test the validity of the download. Rick
"if(url.EndsWith(".git")|| url.EndsWith(".zip"))

Rick, this is a great point and I know exactly what you mean -

Having spoken with Siebren, reviewing the code and the json file, I think I'm interpreting correctly, that the goal was "Github repository" OR "ZIP file from somewhere other than github".
If you look at the current list - the few routes that are downloaded as Zip files, those aren't coming from github. So I think that's the intention - to allow for a zipped route on say the openrails.org website to be downloaded and installed at the click of a button, OR to allow a git repo. I agree that the github "Download this repo as a zip is unreliable as I've seen that first hand.

Siebren's code will allow the user to download the route without needing github desktop, nor the knowledge of how to clone a remote repo down locally.

[rickloader]

Thank you Jack and Siebren. It will be very good if the OR 1 click can access the latest repo from github. Would it be possible to go 1 stage further please? i am thinking of a "check this route for updates" button. That way users can be independant of Desktop, and route builders can know that users have the latest version when problems are reported.
Thanks Rick

[Siebren]

rickloader, on 01 March 2024 - 08:06 AM, said:

Would it be possible to go 1 stage further please? i am thinking of a "check this route for updates" button. That way users can be independant of Desktop, and route builders can know that users have the latest version when problems are reported.
Thanks Rick

On the Menu Download Content window there is an Update button. Is that what you are suggesting? I could add a check when user starts the route, but I would not like issuing commands to GitHub every time a route is started. And if an user is really interested a watch can be set on the GitHub repository. Then user gets mails when changes occur on the repository.

Also the Info button gives the following information:

Quote

Changed local file(s) after the install (git status):
- No changed files found

Added local file(s) after the install (git status):
- No added files found

Remote GitHub Updates available:
- No updates found

Any other suggestions are welcome.

[rickloader]

Yes, the info and repo watch you describe will be fine. I agree it is bad to have automatic checks. No action needed then! Thanks for considering my suggestion, and your work on this feature
Rick

[cjakeman]

This is a question for Siebren, but I guess the answer might be more useful in a public forum.


In a mini-route zip archive, does your downloader require folders like "Global", "Routes" etc. to be at the top level, or will it find them if they are at the next level.

For example, should a zip like DemoModel1.zip contain:


/DemoModel1/
../Global/
../Routes/
...../SCE/
......../Activities/

or

/Global/
/Routes/
.../SCE/
....../Activities/


If it copes with both forms, which is preferred?

Thanks,

[Siebren]

Currently after the download the installer is searching for a Global directory. If it's one level lower it takes that into account. In the above example there will be an extra unnecessary DemoModel1 directory. Does not harm.

However in the downloader software suggestions I made to James this extra directory must be left out. And the top level of the zip file must be the Global, Routes, etc. level. Currently this DemoModel1 is the only downloadable route with this extra sub directory.

[cjakeman]

Thanks, Siebren. Very clear.

I'll pass this on to TtrainSimulations.net for their Starter Route.
I can also re-issue the Demo Model 1 without the unnecessary folder at the top-level.

[Siebren]

Yes, reissuing would be nice. Then we would not have to worry about that extra directory.

thanks, Siebren.