On Wed 10. September 2003 16:26, you wrote: > Curtis Olson wrote: > > This is all very true, especially in the open source world. However, > > speaking as the flightgear project maintainer, I get the sense that we > > are starting to collect a number of half finished (or just barely > > started) aircraft that really aren't coherent or flyable yet. I > > realize building aircraft for FlightGear is a ***lot*** of work, and I > > don't want to knock the contributions that everyone has made, they are > > very welcome. But the flip side is that a new user who is trying > > flightgear for the very first time might have to go through several > > aircraft before they find one that flies plausibly through all the > > normal flight regimes. > > Agreed. But that's really a FlightGear issue. > > What I've been thinking of is setting up a flag somehow that could be > checked to indicate which aircraft probably shouldn't be included in the > official base package archive. > > Erik IMHO fully suficient should be leave a note in description tag in set.xml file so it show if you run --show-aircrafts
for example shuttle-jsbsim Space Shuttle [unflyable alfa version without 3d model and cockpit] or just shuttle-jsbsim Space Shuttle [not finished yed] Regards, Madr _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
