Jim Wilson > > Vivian Meazza said: > > > > > > > Curtis L. Olson asked > > > > > Sent: 24 March 2004 15:36 > > > To: FlightGear developers discussions > > > Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Official 0.9.4 release??? > > > > > > > > > I'm seeing a last minute flurry of people trying to get > final model > > > tweaks into the base package (which is good--great work > > > guys![1]), but > > > haven't heard any other complaints about the pre2 > release. Are we > > > getting pretty close to making this release official so > we can get on > > > with other stuff? > > > > > > > I've got the Seahawk model with a 2d panel working (and I > could give > > it to you now), but on inspection, I don't think it is quite good > > enough to go into a base package. Lee felt that the 3d panel model > > should replace it. I am minded to leave it for now and move > on to the > > promised Spitfire. I can return to it for the next release, if we > > think that 2d panels are worth pursuing. > > > > In general, I'd say they are not worth it. Also before > submitting a second xml wrapper, take a look at the p51d, > and others to see how to combine 2d and 3d into the same > file. There is no need for two separate files. >
In this case I think there is, because the 2d and 3d models have diverged quite significantly. I'll have to bring them back into line before I can use one XML wrapper. Even then, I'm not sure how desirable that might be, because at the moment the 2d model provides functions that are not historically accurate such as HUD or autopilot. Anyway, UNODIR, I'm going to skip this one for now. Regards, Vivian _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
