On Thursday 06 December 2007 08:30:42 Durk Talsma wrote: > Most people suggested dropping the wright flyer. A few people suggested > adding an ultralight. it would be nice to have a historic aircraft (as in a > really old one). During the version number discussion, somebody suggested > doing "named" releases. We could do this implicitly, by changing our choice > of historic aircraft from release to release. So 0.9.10 would have been > release "wright" in retrospect, and 0.9.11/V1.0 could become > release "bleriot". :-)
I think that was a very accurate summary of feelings so far, and agree with pretty much all of the suggested changes. I also quite like the idea above, that we could cycle through the better historic models in each release... I'd like to highlight the Camel of course, but it really requires OSG to work properly, so maybe next release instead ;-) One point which keeps cropping up is "size". While I fully agree that it's important to keep the base package to a reasonable size so that people aren't put off downloading FG, I also think that there's perhaps even a "danger" in not showing off FG quite enough. Without wanting to get into tiresome "my sim's better than yours" comparisons, and definitely not wishing to follow suit like sheep, it's certainly valid to consider the download size of the FS-X and X-Plane demos... Perhaps we just need lots of very nice screenshots in our release publicity to encourage people to explore the aircraft for download instead though ;-) Cheers, AJ ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
