On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 09:59:09 +0200, Erik wrote in message 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> Boris Koenig wrote:
> 
> > P.S.: Erik, I don't seem to have received a reply to my last eMail
> > from you, just tell me if you need more clarification - otherwise
> > some of the questions that I asked are still left open and I would
> > like to get definite feedback regarding the probability for
> > acceptance of my code modifications for the official CVS version -
> > still aiming at adding CBT related funcitonality to FlightGear.
> 
> If the changes are not too far off from the real purpose of FlightGear
> I see no reason to not accept them. But if (for example) the changes 
> involve linking to a video playback library, then they definitely will
> get rejected.

..at the risk of drawing heavy 100k flak ;-) :
What exactly _is_ the real purpose of FlightGear?

..I see FlightGear needs SimGear and Plib and OpenGL, 
while JSBSim can stand alone?  YaSim et al cannot (yet).

..myself, I'd like to see "low tech front ends" to FlightGear, 
to run in clusters on old junk that cannot do OpenGL.
High end upside, is clustered OpenGL, the kind you 
see in movie theaters.  ;-)

-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.



_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to