On Sat, 21 May 2011 14:31:17 -0700, Hal wrote in message
<201105211431.19074.hven...@gmail.com>:
> On Saturday, May 21, 2011 11:11:50 AM Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > ..try "fgfs --show-aircraft --min-status=production "
> >
> >
> > .."--min-status={alpha,beta,early-production,production}"
> > Allows you to define a minimum status level
> > (=development status) for all listed aircraft
> >
>
> Although this should give you a list of aircraft that have been
> tagged as production quality it may miss some aircraft that are
> actually of very high quality and some of the listed aircraft may not
> be truly "production" quality. In fact looking at the list of
> "production" aircraft from my installation I would say that some of
> these are not true production quality. In addition the
> --min-status=production parm does not appear to work on my new GIT
> install as it lists all of the installed aircraft (over 300 of them).
..browsing the list archive, I see mention of argument order
mattering, i.e. "fgfs --show-aircraft --min-status=production"
being different to "fgfs --min-status=production --show-aircraft",
has this changed?
> FGRUN also shows the aircraft status on the Select an Aircraft
> screen.
>
> Another way to locate more developed aircraft is to check to see how
> much space the aircraft uses on the file system. In general the
> bigger the aircrafts directory the more developed it is. For
> example, the p51d (81.1 meg
> - use the jsbsim version), MiG-15 (70.3 meg) and IAR80 (53.8 meg) all
> have very big aircraft directories and are highly developed although
> I don't think that any of the authors consider them to be complete
> yet. Using "--min- status=production" should include the IAR80 in
> it's list but not the p51d- jsbsim (which has a status of early
> production) or the MiG-15 (which has no status information).
>
> There have been long threads here and on the forums about the issue
> of helping users locate the higher quality models. So this is a long
> standing and significant issue. There was a rating system that was
> proposed here that would have made it simple for aircraft authors to
> produce a consistent and verifiable status for their aircraft. The
> system set a very high bar for the higher status ratings. Status
> ratings in this system could be alpha, beta, early production,
> production and advanced production. Using this system the p51d-
> jsbsim model gets an early production status as did the c172p.
> Taking the p51d-jsbsim up for a spin (pun intended) will give you an
> idea how well developed a model under this system needs to be to get
> a production or advanced production rating. Unfortunately it appears
> that only a few of the models are actually using this system.
>
> Hal
..it's also a matter of opinion, some developers are _very_
critical of and demanding on their own work, which is good
for FG release quality but bad for those lofty plans of
release schedules, is why I advocate having the release
dictator play with git until (s)he finds git commit
combinations (s)he likes, and release those on the spot.
--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What Every C/C++ and Fortran developer Should Know!
Read this article and learn how Intel has extended the reach of its
next-generation tools to help Windows* and Linux* C/C++ and Fortran
developers boost performance applications - including clusters.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
