On Wednesday, July 27, 2011 04:04:09 AM Slavutinsky Victor wrote:
>
> Moreover, that explanations not provided not for me only but for anyone.
> It's open source but way it open it can not be developed by ones for
> whom it seems to be open. That's the real problem what I can not solve,
> and, I suppose, no one outside of FG community can.
>
The lack of internal documentation is an issue for many of not most open
source projects. One reason for this is that it is a big undertaking to
completely document a system of the complexity of FG.
For example I just "finished" (meaning that it is good enough - not that it is
perfect) documenting a Class for another project. This was a relatively
simple class with about 22 methods. I spent the better part of a week's full
time effort to document it and I wrote the code so I knew what it did before I
started working on the documentation. I have not looked at the FG internals
but I would guess that it has hundreds of Classes and many of these are likely
more complex than the one I just documented. So writing detailed internal
documentation for FG would probably keep some one occupied full time for the
better part of a year.
In the long run having this documentation would help the project but it is a
huge undertaking. In addition, it is an undertaking that has little if any
short term impact on the project which makes it even less attractive for
potential contributers.
Hal
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Got Input? Slashdot Needs You.
Take our quick survey online. Come on, we don't ask for help often.
Plus, you'll get a chance to win $100 to spend on ThinkGeek.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/slashdot-survey
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
