Norman Vine wrote:
Boris Koenig writes:

Boris Koenig  writes:

Ya, I see - and somehow even gotta agree ... having meanwhile tried to
summarize the Nasal extensions thatsee I would *minimally* need,

_I_ don't *need* a certain extension,

so which is it < see quote above >

Sorry, talking of two different "needs" here - the one being some minor Nasal extensions and the other the overall idea behind the concept, sorry if I wasn't clear about that, but of course the whole thing gets pointless if the idea is dropped. While I certainly would love to put some spare time into such a thing (and other users would obviously also be willing to contribute), I don't "need" to get the project running. That's what I meant.

but rather would like to be able to extend FlightGear itself in a way to make it useful for even a broader audience.

Best way to do that is to contribute directly to FlightGear rather then start a site of your own :-)

Well, you really don't seem to have read the webpage or at least some of my posting here. Hence a _short: summary: :-)

a)      I was _asked_ to create a webpage in order to give a basic
        impression of the idea behind FliteTutor, particularly for
        the developers on the mailing list, as it is not that simple
        to explain the details with a single mail.

b)      I don't meant to make this a project of its own - it's
        gonna heavily depend on FlightGear anyways - but I've made
        clear exactly that on the webpage as well.

c)      I wouldn't mind to directly contribute to FlightGear, but some
        of the things that I would require seem to be too special for
        FlightGear itself, or there exist even general objections
        against some of the functionality to be integrated.

d)      I am told that only minor code changes to FlightGear would be
        required to implement the basic functionality that I would like
        to see - so, "contributing directly to FlightGear" might not
        even be necessary in the first place if most of the
        functionality  can be achieved using already existing features.

e)      And then of course: directly contributing to FlightGear itself
        by means of writing code is certainly not that easy, IF you are
        new to the source, architecture and underlying subsystems. So,
        taking the lack of specific documentation for new FlightGear
        programmers into account, one would require a rather steep
        learning curve in order to get the necessary familiarity with
        FlightGear BEFORE actively making changes, otherwise the chances
        are good that one could easily mess up the whole thing,simply
        because you lack the required insights.

chance's-are-the-needed-changes-will-be-more-forthcomingl'y y'rs

That's what I actually hoped for.

Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to