Hi, On Dec 16, 2008, at 10:54 PM, James Turner <zakal...@mac.com> wrote: > > On 16 Dec 2008, at 13:45, Frederic Bouvier wrote: > >>> After 2.0 I'll start merging in my Effects framework code that will >>> make, among other things, local light sources practical. I'm not >>> sure if the best way to do cockpit lighting is to have a light >>> source in the cockpit or to simply turn up >>> the emissiveness of the instruments and dashboard... >> >> I don't think there will be a 2.0 anytime soon. It took 10 years to >> have >> v1.0 . I hope you mean 1.99.5 > > Heh, I was wondering about this - I'm hopeful that Tim means what he > wrote, but that 2.0 will also be along soon, maybe even Q1 2009. And > then 2.1, 2.2
I guess Tim means 1.9.0, not 2.0. Actually 1.99.5 is just a temporal number for fgfs/cvs and (I believe) we're heading to 1.9.0. Curt told us that he put 1.99.5 since he had missed the discussion on this list about the version number for the first OSG release. This is why I gave 1.9.0-preN to mac binaries. Got confused? The final dicision will be made soon, so we'll see. Anyway, shorter release cycle can give flightgear a chance to get more attension, so I like that idea. If quarterly releasing cycle is a bit too often, then semiannual is fine for me. What do you guys think? Tat ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada. The future of the web can't happen without you. Join us at MIX09 to help pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
