Good news, indeed and kudos to Virgin Media!
Curt and James, what would you think about publishing the release during
the weekend
Sept. 14./15.? Or would you prefer to stick to the 17th (a Tuesday)?
Torsten
Am 15.08.2013 09:21, schrieb James Turner:
On 14 Aug 2013, at 21:57, Curtis Olson
On 15 Aug 2013, at 09:46, Torsten Dreyer tors...@t3r.de wrote:
Curt and James, what would you think about publishing the release during the
weekend
Sept. 14./15.? Or would you prefer to stick to the 17th (a Tuesday)?
I'm actually returning from a weeks holiday that weekend, so the Tuesday
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Dave L wrote:
The ATIS is now in a releasable state. If as many people as possible could
use it in the next couple of days and report any breakage that would be
good.
Cheers - Dave
Hi Dave,
Doesn't sound quite as good as the real recording we had
On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Stuart Buchanan ... wrote:
On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:21 AM, Dave L wrote:
The ATIS is now in a releasable state. If as many people as possible
could
use it in the next couple of days and report any breakage that would be
good.
Cheers - Dave
Hi
The ATIS is now in a releasable state. If as many people as possible could
use it in the next couple of days and report any breakage that would be
good.
Cheers - Dave
--
Learn how Oracle Real Application Clusters (RAC)
On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 13:12 -0700, John Denker wrote:
One begins to wonder whether some of the place-names should be loaded
on a tile-by-tile basis (like scenery) rather than in one big chunk.
One plan I have (but did not find the time to implement) was to mmap the
voice data file and copy
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 12:12 AM, John Denker j...@av8n.com wrote:
It may not be an entirely good idea to release a FlightGear version without
any usable ATIS.
It appears that ATC/atis.cxx is a stub. It contains only one line of code.
Meanwhile there is ye olde ATCDCL/atis.cxx, which
On 12/23/2010 05:33 AM, Dave L wrote:
At the moment, the spoken ATIS makes little sense anyway since the
phaseology was corrected a while ago but the extra words were not
recorded.
Well, actually the needed words are available. Long ago I wrote a
script to run the words through the
On Thursday 23 December 2010 21:12:16 John Denker wrote:
Maybe if you have a text-to-speech system set up it works properly,
but I assume most people downloading the new release will not have
that setup by default.
Agreed. Getting TTS to work live (as opposed to batch) is way more
On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 8:12 PM, John Denker wrote:
snip
To work properly, atis.cxx needs not only the standard ATIS phraseology
but also the /names/ of the ATIS/AWOS sites (usually but not necessarily
airports). If you include the names of all US airports, the .vce file
has more than 2300
It may not be an entirely good idea to release a FlightGear version without
any usable ATIS.
It appears that ATC/atis.cxx is a stub. It contains only one line of code.
Meanwhile there is ye olde ATCDCL/atis.cxx, which contains code but is
deprecated and is not compiled in the standard
Hi All,
After a period of having been extremely busy at work, following a switch
of jobs and moving to a different country, I'm slowly coming back to
life. December is already well on it's way, and it would be great if we
could manage another major release this year.
I realize that
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, Hal V. Engel wrote:
With this in mind I have used the Stuart's rating system and coded the status
line of the p51d-jsbsim-set.xml file with the following:
statusFDM: 5, Systems: 4, Model: 3, Cockpit: 3/status
Hi,
On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 12:38 -0800, Hal V. Engel wrote:
The most recent JSBSIm update is picky about some things that previous
versions would work with. I had to do a lot of work (about twos days effort)
on my model to get it working after that update. I don't know how common it
will be
On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 08:18 +, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
I'm also in favour of the v2.2.0 version number. Assuming this is
agreed, I'll update The Manual.
If 2.2.0 would suggest the next release will be the next stable release
then I won't hold my breath just yet. Especially the new shaders
Hi Stuart,
Stuart Buchanan wrote:
Martin - does this address your concern?
Well, at the end of the day it's completely irrelevant if my concerns
are being addressed ;-)
In fact, it's not my 'playground'. I just got the impression that the
gap between the ideas of a rating system for use with
Am Samstag, den 11.12.2010, 16:00 -0800 schrieb Hal V. Engel:
[...]
The thing about Stuart's system is that it is very objective, easy for devs
to apply (IE. it is not complex and only takes a few minutes to do) and
provides users with a lot more information about the state of the models
Hi All,
After a period of having been extremely busy at work, following a switch of
jobs and moving to a different country, I'm slowly coming back to life.
December is already well on it's way, and it would be great if we could manage
another major release this year. Behind the scenes, James
Hi Durk and all,
Durk wrote:
After a period of having been extremely busy at work, following a switch of
jobs and moving to a different country,
I'm slowly coming back to life. December is already well on it's way, and it
would be great if we could manage
another major release this
Gijs de Rooy wrote:
Great news Durk! One thing that came up in my mind: would it be good to write
a post at the forum, to stimulate
people to put their planes into Git as soon as possible? We have quite some
nice (GPL) stuff hanging around, that's
not been commited yet [...]
Actually I'm
On Sat, 2010-12-11 at 11:08 +0100, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
Hi Durk and all,
Durk wrote:
After a period of having been extremely busy at work, following a
switch of jobs and moving to a different country,
I'm slowly coming back to life. December is already well on it's
way, and it would
2010/12/11 Martin Spott martin.sp...@mgras.net
If people
are serious about their stuff, then they'll have to learn to commit
their stuff early _without_ being faced with some release deadline.
If they don't, their problem - next time, after the release passed
without their contribution
Martin Spott wrote:
The traditional scheme that a few people have to work fulltime for a
couple of days during the release process just because others have
simply been lazy over the past year doesn't have to be this way.
This sentence was written in hurry and therefore came out a little bit
On 11.12.2010 09:16, Durk Talsma wrote:
Firstly, what is the next version number going to be. My initial
thought would be 2.1.0, but it also makes sense to call if 2.2.0
(thanks for the suggestion, James), so that we can reserve 2.1.0. for
bugfixes on the current version, or at least move toward
On 11 Dec 2010, at 11:08, Gijs de Rooy wrote:
Great news Durk! One thing that came up in my mind: would it be good to write
a post at the forum, to stimulate
people to put their planes into Git as soon as possible? We have quite some
nice (GPL) stuff hanging around, that's
not been
Hi,
Nice to hear to have a new release soon.
But:
Gijs de Rooy wrote:
Great news Durk! One thing that came up in my mind:
would it be good to write a post at the forum, to stimulate
people to put their planes into Git as soon as
possible? We have quite some nice (GPL) stuff hanging
Heiko Schulz wrote:
But I agree to Gijs that it would be more than nice to add a reminder
and a information about the started release procedure- we need the
help of the users to find out bugs and other problems.
That people don't let it commit to GIT is due to the fact, that many
people
Seconly, do we want to maintain our current aircraft selection, or do we
want to include a (partially) updated selection from our git repository, or
-alternatively- do we want to strip the entire selection down to just single
aircraft, and make the others downloadable from our main website.
Seconly, do we want to maintain our current aircraft selection, or do we want
to include a (partially) updated selection from our git repository, or
-alternatively- do we want to strip the entire selection down to just single
aircraft, and make the others downloadable from our main
On Sat, 11 Dec 2010, Hal V. Engel wrote:
With this in mind I have used the Stuart's rating system and coded the status
line of the p51d-jsbsim-set.xml file with the following:
statusFDM: 5, Systems: 4, Model: 3, Cockpit: 3/status
Hi,
If we go down this route (I'm not convinced this need to
Hal V. Engel wrote:
In general I agree that just taking all of the aircraft on GIT and making
them
available for download without some kind of rating system is a bad idea.
Actually we don't, in contrast, we already _do_ have sort of a (simple)
rating schema. When you look at the Aircraft
On Saturday 11 December 2010 13:38:44 Hal V. Engel wrote:
Also I don't know if Ron is planning on updating his engine/oil cooling
code anytime soon but there is the possibility that there may be some
changes to JSBSIm still in the pipe line and these should go in as soon as
possible so that
Hi,
just updated the builder package. It can be downloaded at
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-current.tar.gz
(alias
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-20061108.tar.gz)
Arnt, I tried to add a brlcad product with your configure-options from
the
On Wed, Nov 08, 2006 at 11:17:16AM +0100, Ralf Gerlich wrote:
Hi,
just updated the builder package. It can be downloaded at
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-current.tar.gz
(alias
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-20061108.tar.gz)
Thanks
On Wed, 8 Nov 2006 11:17:16 +0100, Ralf wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi,
just updated the builder package. It can be downloaded at
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-current.tar.gz
(alias
Hello all,
I have just released a new version of fgfs-builder at
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-current.tar.gz
The new version includes the setup for the new OSG-based version. I
modularised the structure of the build system. It still includes
automatic checkout from
Hi,
and here we go: The first update. ;-)
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-current.tar.gz
(alias
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-20061107-2.tar.gz)
Fixes an issue with the automatic downloading and with OpenThreads
dependencies in
another but, sorry for bothering :)
We need openal / alut from svn
i think that would be nice if we add it to build system
g++ -g -O2 -D_REENTRANT
-L/home/qmx/build/fgfs-builder-20061107/install/lib -L/usr/X11R6/lib
-o openal_test1 openal_test1.o ../../simgear/debug/libsgdebug.a
-lopenal -lm
On Tue, 7 Nov 2006 12:19:52 -0200, Douglas wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 11/7/06, Ralf Gerlich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
and here we go: The first update. ;-)
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Misc_rag/fgfs-builder-current.tar.gz
(alias
to all that interests
preliminary and very ugly patches to build openal and alut from svn
I'm sure that this autoconf hack is specific for ubuntu edgy (and yes,
it is ugly)
can someone help-me with dependencies patch?
apply all patches with -p1
On 11/7/06, Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..I agree all deps should be part of the build system, but we
should not build all deps in the build system, especially when
we start building backport binaries for Debian, Red Hat, Fedora etc.
As I say in the README.txt, I included all packages which cannot be
Hi,
Douglas Campos wrote:
to all that interests
preliminary and very ugly patches to build openal and alut from svn
Looks good.
I'm sure that this autoconf hack is specific for ubuntu edgy (and yes,
it is ugly)
What exactly does autoupdate do on ubuntu? Is it an alternative for
autogen.sh
last minute patch
Fixes building of Simgear with installed libalut
thanx to pigeon (#flightgear) for pointing it out
On 11/7/06, Ralf Gerlich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Douglas Campos wrote:
to all that interests
preliminary and very ugly patches to build openal and alut from svn
Looks
last minute patch
Fixes building of Simgear with installed libalut
thanx to pigeon (#flightgear) for pointing it out
I also want to make a note here to point out that I've got this
issue before, which is when you build SG it fails when building all the
SG test programs, and the cause is
I've packaged up the latest JSBSim code into 0.9.10 (Pre-v1.0). It is
available in the Files section of www.sf.net/projects/jsbsim.
There are executables built for several versions of Linux: i386, PPC, AMD64.
There is a Win32 executable. Simplot is available there for Win32. The
source archive is
45 matches
Mail list logo
