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

Reply via email to