* Curtis L. Olson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-01-20 15:30]: > 4. We need to do some work on the fgrun front end to make it more user > friendly. Frederic and Bernie (and others?) have done a *lot* of great, > difficult, and tedious work on this tool to bring it to where it is, but > there are still some gaps and things that could be much improved to make > the tool work for new users. There are also some human factors/feedback > issues with fgrun and launching flightgear that (again are hard but) > would be nice to address.
Would it be preferable then, to package the windows version of FG with fgrun and centre the docs around using fgrun while still catering for 'more advanced' command line usage in the documentation? I think it's fair to say that there are a lot more linux users now than there were just a couple of years ago who have come over from Windows. These people would also benefit from a GUI too... I am not trying to open the can of worms marked 'default GUI for FGFS'. I merely think that Curt is absolutely right. You can use the command line interface if you wish but one or more GUI options is an absolute requirement and when it comes to documentation, it may be that to cut down on work we may have to adopt one GUI interface and only document that. All the best, Matthew (Donning flame suit as we speak ;-) _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
