* Tatsuhiro Nishioka -- Tuesday 07 April 2009: > I hope many people understands what Melchior said on the property > system.
They don't. They are already drooling over the awaited shader changes. They fell for the argument that this change is in any way required/desirable, and they give a damn about the cleanliness, universality and power of the architecture. Prettiness does now have top priority, while a strong foundation was moved down the list. This will bite you all in the butt later on, but you were warned! :-P > His "going home" thing didn't mean that he just wants to hide > away unless his opinion is accepted, but he wanted to say the proposed > vector format is that bad in terms of software architecture. My announcement to leave was in response to Curt's "green light" and vote, to his opinion that the arguments against the change weren't strong enough. Had I assumed that this isn't decided yet, then I would neither have made the announcement, nor given up. But actually, I'm convinced that this *is* decided. FlightGear's architecture will be sacrificed to Tim's dislike of the verbosity of XML (a format that was chosen on purpose). Tons of code will be added everywhere to make the change kind-of work out. You'll never see any advantages, but some things will stop working. But then again: what do I lose? I will continue using fgfs, and I will continue hacking my private copy of fgfs. I'll just not commit any code to FlightGearTNG. I'll just be one of the bo105 developers (together with Maik). It's not so much a sad time for me, but mainly for FlightGear. m. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: High Quality Requirements in a Collaborative Environment. Download a free trial of Rational Requirements Composer Now! http://p.sf.net/sfu/www-ibm-com _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel