"gh.robin" wrote:
> On Mon 26 February 2007 23:02, Martin Spott wrote:
> > Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> > > Please stop committing any more of those crappy AAR.nas files.
> >
> > This aircraft is still in development (at least I consider this to be
> > the case ;-) - a friendly pointer would have been completely
> > sufficient,
> Using these generic files should be considered to be optional, not to be a
> strict obligation.
In the case of the B-2 the AAR file is identical to that of the B-52 -
so creating a generic one is certainly not a bad idea compared to
duplicating identical code ....
> Does the authors are free to do what they want to do ?
What would you define as "free" ? Well, there's no dictate of what you
should do or what you should avoid to to, but FlightGear certainly
benefits from the attempt to keep a certain level of "good taste".
Cheers,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
