On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 02:48:02 +0200
Geoff McLane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, if you can download the 100% of the 'free' SOURCE,
you already have 100% of the 'free' 'documentation'? What
more can you 'want' from the author?
Only the source can 'perfectly' describe up-to-the-minute
Erik Hofman writes:
So it's either stop adding useful and/or fun features and start
working on the docs, or continue your useful work and I'll find
my way to get the info. Maybe I'll ask on the proper mailing list.
User docs are an excellent way for non-programmers (and
non-3D-artists, in
Richard A Downing FBCS [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 02:48:02 +0200
Geoff McLane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, if you can download the 100% of the 'free' SOURCE,
you already have 100% of the 'free' 'documentation'? What
more can you 'want' from the author?
I'm so
Jim Wilson writes:
Richard A Downing FBCS [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I'm so glad that's a 'Humble' opinion. It's also just about the
most stupid thing I have ever read on a serious mailing list.
Now *that* is a flame.
... whatever it is, it is best answered with an invitation. When
David Megginson wrote:
Jim Wilson writes:
Richard A Downing FBCS [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I'm so glad that's a 'Humble' opinion. It's also just about the
most stupid thing I have ever read on a serious mailing list.
Now *that* is a flame.
... whatever it is, it is best
Frederic Bouvier writes:
Sure. Anyone wanting to improve the situation is invited to do so.
Especially for doc, I am more confortable writing C++ than english.
Absolutely. As Adam Smith would say, if he were project manager, let
each contribute in accordance with his (or her) natural
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003 18:25:34 +0200
Frederic Bouvier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
Jim Wilson writes:
Why don't we all invite Richard to
write the documentation that he thinks FlightGear or FGSD should have,
and offer our assistance in answering his questions and
miss-quote-seen-here-recently -
And before I'm pointed at FGSD, 'the-free-source',
I've looked - but with almost no documentation it is
not usable.
IMHO, if you can download the 100% of the 'free' SOURCE,
you already have 100% of the 'free' 'documentation'? What
more can you 'want' from the
On Sat, 19 Jul 2003 16:17:00 -0400
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Richard A Downing writes:
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
WARNING !
FGFS is *NOT* a navigation tool and *NOT* to be used as such
However
from math import pi
SG_RAD_TO_NM = 3437.7467707849392526
Richard A Downing wrote:
What I would dearly like to do is to write a graphical
program to import the default.apt.gz etc, draw the
airport, and graphically edit it, including drawing in
the missing taxiways, stands and aprons. Position of
navaids (with models), building models and the
On Fri, 18 Jul 2003 20:30:15 -0400
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Richard A Downing writes:
I'm working my way through some of the UK aerodromes, and have hit
some problems agreeing ANY of the decimal coordinates
in the FG files with the DMS coordinates given in the UK AIP.
Richard A Downing writes:
I'm working my way through some of the UK aerodromes, and have hit some problems
agreeing ANY of the decimal coordinates
in the FG files with the DMS coordinates given in the UK AIP.
For instance, London Gatwick (EGKK) has ARP at N510853 W0001125, which by my
Richard A Downing writes:
I'm working my way through some of the UK aerodromes, and have hit
some problems agreeing ANY of the decimal coordinates
in the FG files with the DMS coordinates given in the UK AIP.
probably worth while reading this just to
make sure you have the 'maths' right
13 matches
Mail list logo
