Hi Tim,
Tim Moore wrote:
> I also think it's a good idea to factor out the dependencies that the visual
> part of flightgear has on the whole flightgear implementation. It's not
> right at the head of my queue, but I support the idea and will look for ways
> to move it along.
As far as I understood Mathias, a too large fraction of the time he
spent for the OSG port was required simply to detangle a pile of quite
obscure interdependencies between the former viewer code and the
so-called FlightGear core. Do I sense the project heading down the same
road as before now that a new example has been put into place ?
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
