On Dec 9, 2007 9:21 AM, Melchior FRANZ <> wrote:
> * Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Sunday 09 December 2007:
> > For downloadable add-on aircraft, 3D instruments should be stored
> > inside each downloadable aircraft package even these can be duplicated.
>
> NO! $FG_ROOT/Aircraft/{Generic,Instruments,Instruments-3d} are to
> be shipped with the release. They are meant to contain shared files
> and these files *must* *not* be copied to every single aircraft.
> (Of course, you are free to copy whatever pleases you in aircraft
> that you distribute on your own.)
Yes! :-) I think both of you make good points.
There is a dilema here and probably not one right or perfect answer.
If you are an aircraft designer and depending on things in the shared
directories, understand that these may be subject to change. That could be
good: you get the newer version of the object automatically, or it could be
bad: a change to a common object breaks your aircraft. Newer aircraft may
not work with older versions of FlightGear that don't have the shared pieces
you expect. If you make a local copy of a shared item for your aircraft,
just flip all those things around. Your aircraft won't be broke when
something outside of your control changes, but you also won't automatically
get the updates and improvements to these objects. And we never have
complete aircraft independence because aircraft are dependent on all the
supporting code in FlightGear to run.
I think it boils down to the preferences of the aircraft designer. If you
depend on shared items, the burden is on you to check and test once in a
while and make sure no changes in the common files break your design. If
you make local copies of shared items, then you also have a burden to track
the changes in the common files and update your local copies in order to get
improvements or bug fixes.
For aircraft that are distributed with flightgear and put in CVS, I think it
makes more sense to depend on the common objects. Developers that change
those shared objects and scripts have an opportunity (obligation?) to test
your aircraft and make sure their changes don't break anything. For
aircraft that are developed and distributed outside the
flightgear.orgrealm, then it probably makes more sense to keep your
own local copies of
shared objects and just update and test them as needed.
Curt.
--
Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/
Unique text: 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
