Am Dienstag, den 27.02.2007, 09:14 +0100 schrieb gh.robin: > On Tue 27 February 2007 00:07, Martin Spott wrote: > > Martin Spott wrote: > > > 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". > > > > s/keep/maintain/g > > > > Martin. > Martin, > i agree with you, if the maintenance is not done by the author. > > If the author is allowed to maintain it, that author could have in mind some > development which goes against these dictates, and nobody else can do it > instead of him, but one who can read the mind of the author (divination > power). > Nobody dictates you to use the generic AAR.nas. If you need special features for an Aircraft it is perfectly allright to have a different one. Who knows, maybe the feature you wish to implement is of good use to another aircraft using AAR. So why not improve the generic function with it? IMHO the generic AAR or Aircraft functions are a great benefit to Aircraft Developers, as they don't need to invent the wheel twice or reuse code from other aircraft that they don't fully understand (I know I have) and the nas scripts are easily ported to other aircraft. I even like to have more of these (e.g. Livery select, pilot-g). It helps people without programming background (like me) to create featureful aircraft.
> Regards Greetings Detlef ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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